Vikings Message Board.Com

Well, there were some real positives and a few not so positives in this one. While the backup OL players looked like... well... backup OL players, that is to be expected. One thing that casual fans undervalue is the chemistry it takes to be a quality NFL line. Once the starters are set and you see some of these guys rotate in, you'll see a much improved group. However, none really stood out, either. Maybe someone else saw something intriguing?

That run by Zach Line was hilarious and glorious. Unfortunately, it may be the highlight of his career. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't know that he will get out of preseason. There are a lot of good RBs looking to backup and wait their turn behind AD and Gerhart. But it was a fun play to watch!

Patterson looks like the real deal. He is going to be great addition and leader for this WR corps. I say leader, because Jennings is here as a mentor to give the kid a season or two to get... um... seasoned. I really like the athleticism and sideling presence he was showing.

QBs looked shaky, but Cassel looked consistent, aside from the throws under pressure. I think he'll be a quality back up. MBT looked bad. Third string forever bad. And Vandenberg. Ugh. Poor kid was on his back more often than not.

The defense had some high points, especially the DL. I like the depth and maybe having a platoon system will work. They ran a pretty vanilla scheme, but I was a bit worried about the cut back runs that were slicing and dicing the defense. Too many bad memories to allow that to slip by without comment. LBs should be an interesting group to watch develop. And there are definitely going to be some growing pains with the DBs, but was generally ok with their first look.

Blair Walsh looked fine. Locke started out really well, and I think he will excel at situational punting, but I am not thrilled with his lack of distance down the stretch. We'll see.

Overall, an encouraging, if very vanilla, start to the preseason.

Oh, and I HATE the new uniforms. To each their own, of course, but yuck. Helmets that are a different shade of purple from the jerseys? Really? And those numbers are too trendy. They'll be out of fashion by midseason. I'm an old fart, though, so take my rant at face value.

BGM wrote:Well, there were some real positives and a few not so positives in this one. While the backup OL players looked like... well... backup OL players, that is to be expected. One thing that casual fans undervalue is the chemistry it takes to be a quality NFL line. Once the starters are set and you see some of these guys rotate in, you'll see a much improved group. However, none really stood out, either. Maybe someone else saw something intriguing?

I thought Brandon Keith at left tackle didn't look terrible. He has some NFL starting experience, too, so he's an early favorite in my book to earn a backup spot on the OL.

The two rookie guards, Jeff Baca and Travis Bond, were turnstyles. As 6th and 7th rounders, respectively, the Vikings don't have a lot invested in them, so hard to say what their fate will be. Maybe potential practice squaders.

That run by Zach Line was hilarious and glorious. Unfortunately, it may be the highlight of his career. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't know that he will get out of preseason. There are a lot of good RBs looking to backup and wait their turn behind AD and Gerhart. But it was a fun play to watch!

What was hilarious about it? Other than maybe the tackling by the Texans backups.

My only issue with Line is that they have him trying to make the team as a fullback. Even Spielman while in the booth called him a fullback and talked about him learning blocking assignments. In the Vikings scheme, the fullback almost never touches the ball, so it really doesn't matter what his skills as a running back are. Not to mention that the Vikings already have their starting fullback in Felton, a solid H-back in Ellison, and Line is physically similar in size and style to both Asiata and Gerhart, with all of them at about 230 lbs. Maybe he could replace Asiata but who needs all those tweener running backs?

Patterson looks like the real deal. He is going to be great addition and leader for this WR corps. I say leader, because Jennings is here as a mentor to give the kid a season or two to get... um... seasoned. I really like the athleticism and sideling presence he was showing.

Yes, he's already showing encouraging signs. But while he did look athletic, my impression watching him move on the field was that he looks like a small tight end. There's just something a little clunky about him.

QBs looked shaky, but Cassel looked consistent, aside from the throws under pressure. I think he'll be a quality back up. MBT looked bad. Third string forever bad. And Vandenberg. Ugh. Poor kid was on his back more often than not.

I really hope that the Vikings have the balls to go with just two QBs this year and open up a spot for some young player at another position.

The defense had some high points, especially the DL. I like the depth and maybe having a platoon system will work. They ran a pretty vanilla scheme, but I was a bit worried about the cut back runs that were slicing and dicing the defense. Too many bad memories to allow that to slip by without comment.

The Vikings have been deep on the DL for several years, despite their problems and despite not having anyone really shine consistently. This year they have to be giving some thought to next season, where that depth could completely evaporate with player departures.

LBs should be an interesting group to watch develop. And there are definitely going to be some growing pains with the DBs, but was generally ok with their first look.

The linebackers are definitely interesting. I thought Audie Cole looked poor, certainly in comparison to Michael Mauti. Mauti just has that classic middle linebacker look on the field, with his awareness, the shedding of blocks, and moving all over the field. I think he'll soon be the first backup at MLB. If he stays healthy, he's going to be a good one.

Blair Walsh looked fine. Locke started out really well, and I think he will excel at situational punting, but I am not thrilled with his lack of distance down the stretch. We'll see.

Yeah, I'm not particularly worried about Locke, but I'm also not too impressed yet, either.

Oh, and I HATE the new uniforms. To each their own, of course, but yuck. Helmets that are a different shade of purple from the jerseys? Really? And those numbers are too trendy. They'll be out of fashion by midseason. I'm an old fart, though, so take my rant at face value.

Too cute, too trendy, trying too hard to be different. Yeah, I think the helmets are really odd looking. The numbers and the shoulder stripes are just plain embarrassingly dumb. They're something that I could see proposed by a freshman graphic artist and immediately rejected by anyone with a sense of tradition. I'm not sure how the overall shade of purple compares to the last uniform, but it's way too bright. Despite all that, it's still an improvement over the last uniform, which I thought was hideous.

I'm an old fart, too, but I like these unis more than the arena league ones the Vikes have sported since 2006.
Kind of think the black fac masks are kind of stupid, too ... Just a way for Nike to get black in the design. Pretty useless (it's hardly noticeable, so who could really care?)

The difference in the purple between helmet and uniform has been a phenomenon ever since they went inside the Metrodome. The lighting must be terrible for video and still cameras in there.

VikeMike wrote:I'm an old fart, too, but I like these unis more than the arena league ones the Vikes have sported since 2006.
Kind of think the black fac masks are kind of stupid, too ... Just a way for Nike to get black in the design. Pretty useless (it's hardly noticeable, so who could really care?)

The difference in the purple between helmet and uniform has been a phenomenon ever since they went inside the Metrodome. The lighting must be terrible for video and still cameras in there.

It's also a question of materials and how they reflect light. Take the same shade of purple, put it on a cloth jersey and a plastic helmet, and it looks different because of the difference in the materials and the way the light reflects off of them.

Dang, I really like our new uniforms! However, in all honesty, my favorite uniform was the one we used from the late 1990s until 2005 with the Norseman on the sleeve. I was kinda hoping they would incorporate the norseman in some way with the new uniform, but oh well.


Anyway, I digress. My thoughts on the game:

- Our backup line was horrendous last night.

- Cordarrelle Patterson has a chance to be a significant contributor this year and could win the starting split end position.

- Zach Line is a guy to watching going forward in the preseason.

- Matt Cassel showed he is competent enough to play if he had to play.

- Sharrif Floyd looks every bit of explosive as promised.

Mothman wrote:It's also a question of materials and how they reflect light. Take the same shade of purple, put it on a cloth jersey and a plastic helmet, and it looks different because of the difference in the materials and the way the light reflects off of them.

While that's fairly obvious, if it's really the main factor in the difference in appearance, can't you try to work with that and find a better compromise? You're never going to get an exact match, but surely you could do better.

VikeMike wrote:I'm an old fart, too, but I like these unis more than the arena league ones the Vikes have sported since 2006.
Kind of think the black fac masks are kind of stupid, too ... Just a way for Nike to get black in the design. Pretty useless (it's hardly noticeable, so who could really care?)

The difference in the purple between helmet and uniform has been a phenomenon ever since they went inside the Metrodome. The lighting must be terrible for video and still cameras in there.

The more I look at it, I think you're right that it might be the lighting. To me, this looks like it has a blueish hue:



Same jersey but this one looks like the purple I was expecting to see:

Was at the game and thought both Hopkins and Patterson looked pretty good. I was interested in Hopkins since I did so much pre-draft analysis on him so I kept my eye on him and Shariff Floyd when the Texans had the ball as much as possible. It really is a whole different perspective watching the game live compared to on the fixed in TV angles they give you. We had a lot of guys getting open between Patterson, Simpson, and Wright but Cassell just wasn't hitting them out of their breaks more often than not. It didn't seem like too much pressure was getting to him so I'm not sure what the problem was. WR actually looks like a bit of a strength for us right now. Since we'll likely focus on 2 Wr sets we'll have some good options between Jennings, Patterson, Simpson, and Wright and by the end of the year I'm betting Simpson will be on the bottom of that pile. He did his typical come up short on the route, and even though you're running a slant doesn't even have his arms up till the balls half way too him, minimum effort attempt. It looked catch able in real time anyway.

Floyd was making his presence felt, he looks like a monster, at least in the amount of effort and relentless attack he was bringing to every play. The one time I thought he got shut down pretty well he jumps up and deflects the pass at the last second. For now he has me pretty excited, was super concerned to see him on the turf for so long.

Patterson's route running looked decent, now who knows if he's coming up too short or getting too much depth or has the right timing but the actual cuts and "maneuvering" of the routes looked pretty fluid. He is definitely going to be something special once he puts it all together, he was open a lot. Hopkins had almost identical stats but nabbed a really impressive jump ball for a TD and looked stronger as a run blocker than Patterson but both guys were fun to watch.

Honorable mentions to Carlson, Webb, and Burton, those three were working hard even though the first two didn't get a lot to show out of it. Burton made some decent grabs and was the key blocker for Zach Line's long touchdown. As much as I want Webb to succeed he really was upstaged by Burton but with that said Burton did see a LOT more snaps from what I could tell and Webb was mostly working with MBT and Vandenberg which wasn't pretty.

I really thought it was lame that Ponder played 2 plays. Heck Tom Brady and Peyton Manning played more than he did and I think Ponder could certainly use any and all game time experience he can get, it's not like he's a 10 year vet. Russell Wilson played a significant portion of the first half I believe as well. Not to mention we have a couple new WR's in Jennings and Patterson so getting to work together more couldn't hurt. Maybe they're figuring to give him the first half of game 2 and 3 quarters in game 3.


IN PERSON THE JERSEY'S LOOK PURPLE!

There is not a doubt in my mind that Cassell is a more talented QB than Ponder and that the former should be the starter.

PurplePeopleEater wrote:There is not a doubt in my mind that Cassell is a more talented QB than Ponder and that the former should be the starter.

Cassell was okay but often missed a lot of open receivers. He threw a horrible pick that was just down right bad. Bad throw, bad decision. Cassell is only here so if Ponder get's hurt our win chance doesn't go to 0% like against Green Bay in the playoffs.

PurplePeopleEater wrote:There is not a doubt in my mind that Cassell is a more talented QB than Ponder and that the former should be the starter.

That could be true. I think we'll pretty much know for certain by the end of this season. But if it is true, God help the Vikings, because Cassel is little more than a backup option at QB. And it might take years for the Vikings to find a franchise QB if they have to start their search all over again.

mondry wrote:We had a lot of guys getting open between Patterson, Simpson, and Wright but Cassell just wasn't hitting them out of their breaks more often than not. It didn't seem like too much pressure was getting to him so I'm not sure what the problem was.

Not sure what you're getting at here. Not saying you're wrong, the numbers just don't support your analysis. Cassel was 12/19 for 212 yards and a TD in just 1 half of football. Did you want him going 19/19 for 300 yards lol? The pick was ugly, but he put up good numbers. Threw a 20 yard strike (went for 56) to Burton on 3rd n 15. I don't remember too many plays like that last year. I mean even a couple of the incompletions he put where only the receivers had a shot at the ball. Not bad considering this was his first game with these guys.

mondry wrote:I really thought it was lame that Ponder played 2 plays. Heck Tom Brady and Peyton Manning played more than he did and I think Ponder could certainly use any and all game time experience he can get, it's not like he's a 10 year vet. Russell Wilson played a significant portion of the first half I believe as well. Not to mention we have a couple new WR's in Jennings and Patterson so getting to work together more couldn't hurt.

There, you've summed up what I've been trying to say lol. 2 plays? Really Frazier?

The Vikings have a lot of evaluations to do on the back end of their depth chart. They were probably using this game to give all of those guys a look so they can cut away the fluff going into this week. Let the players with the real shot at the 53-man roster hash it out going forward.

Ponder and the first team offense will most likely get much longer looks the next two weeks. Have faith and trush in Frazier, guys.

I thought Line's run looked hilarious because it looked like he was in slow motion, and he was still out running the defense. It was like watching a cannon ball. It just cracked me up to see a less than aerodynamic player but one loose, I guess.

Cassel will be a good backup, even though he seemed uncomfortable yesterday. Of course, the turnstiles on the OL did not help.

Maybe it's the matte finish on the helmets that is really throwing me. I simply do not dig it at all. And the design of the jerseys just does not work for me, in the least. But I know opinions are going to vary widely. These are my least favorite Vikes uniforms, ever.

BGM wrote:I thought Line's run looked hilarious because it looked like he was in slow motion, and he was still out running the defense. It was like watching a cannon ball. It just cracked me up to see a less than aerodynamic player but one loose, I guess.

Cassel will be a good backup, even though he seemed uncomfortable yesterday. Of course, the turnstiles on the OL did not help.

Maybe it's the matte finish on the helmets that is really throwing me. I simply do not dig it at all. And the design of the jerseys just does not work for me, in the least. But I know opinions are going to vary widely. These are my least favorite Vikes uniforms, ever.

I agree w/ Line. He reminded me of Jerome Wiggins who, back in the day, always did more than he looked like he should be able to do. I remember when he hurdled a guy. He looked like a toad, but there he was pulling off slick, agile maneuvers.