Assessing the Vikings at the One Quarter Mark

[Mothman]

I'm including a simple poll but hoping for good discussion: how do you feel about the first quarter of the Vikings season? Impressed? Disappointed? Encouraged? What do you expect to see over the next 4 games?

This is a wide open topic but it should be about what we've seen thus far this season: Bridgewater's performance in year 2, Barr's progress, Peterson's first 4 games back in the fold, the offense, the defense, the coaching... whatever, as long as it's about the first quarter of this season. We're at the bye, they've played 4 out of 16, where do the Vikes currently stand in your opinion? We have most of two weeks to discuss it...

[DK Sweets]

I'm on mobile so I'll have to vote later, but I'm encouraged. Adrian has looked great, the defense has looked better than it has in more than a decade, and I'm optimistic on Teddy's progression. I can't say I'm impressed yet because we still don't look like a true contender, but I feel like the arrow is clearly pointed up based on what I've seen so far.

[Just Me]

I put "underachieved" as I would have 'expected' them to beat San Francisco. True, they played Denver tough, but they did lose (which was what I expected). I think they are on an "upwards trajectory" and if they continue to play like they did in Denver (Sacks given up notwithstanding) or improve, they will "meet" or exceed my expectations for this year. But frankly, for the first 4 games, they should be 3-1. So - "underachieved." I don't think they'll stay "underachievers" but until they can prove the Denver game was "for real" and the SF game was a "fluke" I'll stand pat.

Still optimistic for the rest of the season, but we shall soon see...

[fiestavike]

I put "underachieved" as I would have 'expected' them to beat San Francisco. True, they played Denver tough, but they did lose (which was what I expected). I think they are on an "upwards trajectory" and if they continue to play like they did in Denver (Sacks given up notwithstanding) or improve, they will "meet" or exceed my expectations for this year. But frankly, for the first 4 games, they should be 3-1. So - "underachieved." I don't think they'll stay "underachievers" but until they can prove the Denver game was "for real" and the SF game was a "fluke" I'll stand pat.

Still optimistic for the rest of the season, but we shall soon see...

I said the same. Underachieved mainly because of the SF game. This team is a lot better than that, and should be 3-1 at the quarter mark.

[chazjabo]

I'm definitely encouraged by what I've seen so far. Week 1 sucked, but i think it's pretty fair to say that it was clearly an anomaly. In my opinion, we have looked like a playoff team in Weeks 2 3 and 4.

Bridgewater looks good. Not great, good. He still occasionally holds the ball too long and misses throws, but he really does have poise and it's nice seeing him able to step up in the pocket and go through progressions, something He Who Shall Not Be Named could never do for those 3 years he was here. One thing I would like to see is him open it up a little more and throw it downfield, although he is extremely efficient on short throws.

Peterson is clearly still Peterson, and can bust a long run any play. My one complaint about him is his pass-blocking, which has always been a weakness for him. I'm also glad we made the adjustment not to run him out of the shotgun too much, he is absolutely deadly when he hits the line of scrimmage with a full head of steam. And short of his fumbles against Detroit, our offense has actually taken care of the ball quite well so far this year.

Recievers look pretty good, and I'm trying to contain myself about Stephon Diggs. I'm so excited about him, he has superstar ability. Obviously it was only one game, but wow he looked explosive. Thielen looked strong as well, as did Wallace, depth is definitely a strength at reciever.

The offensive line has been pretty good up until the Denver game, and Denver probably has the best pass rush in the league. MATT KALIL IS PLAYING WELL. You can't understate the importance of that. He has looked very solid in four games, and with the injuries we've had I think our offensive line has overachieved. I'm not overreacting about the 7 sacks allowed against Denver, although I think we left Clemmings isolated with Von Miller more than we should have.

Defense looks unbelievable. Especially Griffen, Barr, and Smith. Robert Blanton is really the only weakness on our defense, I like Sandejo much better, I hope he gets healthy. Blanton makes a lot of stupid plays. But anyway, our defense continues to make plays and create turnovers. Absolutely love the way they play, it's a classic Zimmer defense. Physical and tough. Really looking forward to watching them progress as the season goes on.

We may need a new kicker, I think I've seen enough of Blair Walsh. Kickers are easy to replace, we need one we can count on.

Anyways, I'm definitely encouraged by the first four weeks and I think we'll only get better from here. I love what Zimmer has done with this team so far and I hope we can go on a little winning streak right now before we reach the brutal part of our schedule.

SKOL VIKES

Charles

[fiestavike]

The offensive line has been pretty good up until the Denver game, and Denver probably has the best pass rush in the league. MATT KALIL IS PLAYING WELL. You can't understate the importance of that. He has looked very solid in four games, and with the injuries we've had I think our offensive line has overachieved. I'm not overreacting about the 7 sacks allowed against Denver, although I think we left Clemmings isolated with Von Miller more than we should have.

I think there is a fair point contained there. weeks 2 and 3 I believe the Vikings surrendered a combined 1 sack. Denver is probably the top pass rushing defense combined with probably the top secondary in the NFL. I don't think we should overreact to our worst unit struggling against that teams strength. That isn't complacency, just encouragement not to be alarmist.

[Mothman]

I think there is a fair point contained there. weeks 2 and 3 I believe the Vikings surrendered a combined 1 sack. Denver is probably the top pass rushing defense combined with probably the top secondary in the NFL. I don't think we should overreact to our worst unit struggling against that teams strength. That isn't complacency, just encouragement not to be alarmist.

I don't think we should overreact to it either but the 49ers had 5 sacks against the Vikes in week 1. That's 12 sacks in the two road games, both of which involved effective blitzing. Maybe the Vikes have some serious issues in pass protection when they have to deal with crowd noise? That's speculation but Bridgewater has only been sacked once so far at home. Such a dramatic differential suggests there may be more going on than just the quality of the opponent, although I'm sure that had something to do with it too.

Edit: I should add that commitment to the run could be another factor in that statistical discrepancy. The Vikes have looked less committed to their running game (and Peterson in particular) on the road thus far. When they can't get that going, and they start passing a lot, it's a signal to the defense to tee off on Bridgewater. That may relate back to the OL performance too. If the run-blocking's not good enough, the running game struggles, leading to an over-reliance on passing, which in turn makes Bridgewater more vulnerable...

[fiestavike]

I don't think we should overreact to it either but the 49ers had 5 sacks against the Vikes in week 1. That's 12 sacks in the two road games, both of which involved effective blitzing. Maybe the Vikes have some serious issues in pass protection when they have to deal with crowd noise? That's speculation but Bridgewater has only been sacked once so far at home. Such a dramatic differential suggests there may be more going on than just the quality of the opponent, although I'm sure that had something to do with it too.

The road noise could be a factor. Its very hard to figure out how to file the 49ers game away. It was such a bizarre performance. I'm tempted to just view it as the Vikings showing up for a preseason game and discovering the opponents were there for a statement game. I'm kind of inclined to pretend it never happened as far as analyzing this team going forward during this season (until/unless they show up that flat again).

Beyond that, I think its much too small a sample size to conclude that its the product of a home/road divide at this point. I still think Denver is legit and forced more of those problems than the Vikings allowed, so to speak.

[chicagopurple]

the games they won, I expected them to win. Losing to Denver was no big surprise but the fact that they had victory in their grasp and failed to secure it was irritating. Losing to SF was not up to par. There is no excuse fo losing to ateam that is falling apart. SO....overall,they have underachieved by 25%......

[Mothman]

The road noise could be a factor. Its very hard to figure out how to file the 49ers game away. It was such a bizarre performance. I'm tempted to just view it as the Vikings showing up for a preseason game and discovering the opponents were there for a statement game. I'm kind of inclined to pretend it never happened as far as analyzing this team going forward during this season (until/unless they show up that flat again).

Beyond that, I think its much too small a sample size to conclude that its the product of a home/road divide at this point. I still think Denver is legit and forced more of those problems than the Vikings allowed, so to speak.

I just edited my post to add another point which may be relevant.

I know what you mean about the 49ers game but I can't dismiss it in terms of analysis. You're right that we have a sample size too small to draw any firm conclusions but it's pretty hard for me to ignore a 12: 1 ratio when it comes to sacks on the road/sacks at home. That seems to speak quite clearly to something (how's that for analysis? LOL!).

I understand your forced/allowed point but aren't they really just two sides of the same coin? Denver certainly forced the issue with good play up front and more blitzing than the Vikes reportedly expected but the Vikes still allowed the outcome of those plays. Even if we say they were simply outmanned, that's a problem.

[akvikingsfan]

Good teams over come injuries and win games. I think this year's team is a good team. They should be able to over come the injuries to the O-Line. The only game that didn't go the way I expected it to was the San Fran game. Due to that loss, and the fashion in which they lost, I said the team is under performing. Now granted, that is the type of game the Vikings ALWAYS lose. Prime time, west coast road game, and a lot of attention from the national media. It was doomed from the start. Still it's a game they should have won.

Over the next quarter (Chiefs, @Lions, @Bears, Rams) I expect them to go 3-1 dropping one of the division games (not sure which one). At the mid-way point my expectation is for the team to be sitting at 5-3. Anything less (in my opinion) is the team under performing.

[losperros]

The Vikings are 2-2. Two home wins, two road losses. That's about what I expected.

Lots of things to like about the team, including Adrian Peterson still being a big threat, Anthony Barr looking good, and some good fight in the Vikings team.

"Team" is important here. The Vikings seem more like a unified team than they have in the past, in my view.

I'm impressed with Bridgewater about a number of things. Most overlooked might be his ability to make plays with his legs. I also think he has good field vision when he runs.

I love the athleticism in the Vikings WR corps. Can't wait for both Johnson and Wright to return. I hope Turner does more with the passing game.

Speaking of receivers, I'm not sure that Stefon Diggs will receive a NFL Life Achievement award just yet. I'm going to wait a bit before a final evaluation on him. Thus far he looks good, minus the fumbles.

OTOH, I still believe the OL is a concern and I don't think their road performances does anything to ease that concern.

[fiestavike]

I know what you mean about the 49ers game but I can't dismiss it in terms of analysis. You're right that we have a sample size too small to draw any firm conclusions but it's pretty hard for me to ignore a 12: 1 ratio when it comes to sacks on the road/sacks at home. That seems to speak quite clearly to something (how's that for analysis? LOL!).

That's fair. I can't expect someone to ignore the 9ers game completely. Still, the big difference between weeks 2-3 and week 4 in my opinion is Denver's personnel and scheme. Once again, we are in territory that only allows for speculation.

I understand your forced/allowed point but aren't they really just two sides of the same coin? Denver certainly forced the issue with good play up front and more blitzing than the Vikes reportedly expected but the Vikes still allowed the outcome of those plays. Even if we say they were simply outmanned, that's a problem.

I'll never say that giving up 7 sacks isn't a problem

It was ugly, but its less ugly to give up 7 sacks against a team that has Denver's combination of pass rush and coverage, than it would have been to give up 7 sacks to San Diego.

As we've both said, its early and there is a small sample size. It might be easier to form judgements later in the season. For example, if the Vikings line plays decent the rest of the way and the Broncos end up breaking the single season sack record, I think we'll look back on this game less as an indictment of the Vikings line than a reflection of the Broncos great defense.

In all likelihood, the picture will be less clear cut than that, but I think the point is still valid. And yes, the Vikings need to be able to perform better, even against top pass rushes if they want to be a great team.

[Mothman]

The Vikings are 2-2. Two home wins, two road losses. That's about what I expected.

Lots of things to like about the team, including Adrian Peterson still being a big threat, Anthony Barr looking good, and some good fight in the Vikings team.

"Team" is important here. The Vikings seem more like a unified team than they have in the past, in my view.

I'm impressed with Bridgewater about a number of things. Most overlooked might be his ability to make plays with his legs. I also think he has good field vision when he runs.

I love the Vikings WR corps. Can't wait for both Johnson and Wright to return. I hope Turner does more with the passing game.

Speaking of receivers, I'm not sure that Stefon Diggs will receive a NFL Life Achievement award just yet.

That line made me actually laugh out loud, Craig.

[mansquatch]

I said underachieved, entirely because of the SF game. They should have won that game and not looked the way they did, so in a population of 4 games, I have to put underachieved since one game that was a loss should not have been a loss.

I think my assessment could change if this question is asked when we’re at 8 games played, we’ll see.