Eagles/Vikings: Striking Similarities on Defense
When one considers where Vikings' coach Brad Childress got his NFL start, it's not terribly surprising to see that there are a lot of similarities between the Minnesota Vikings and the Philadelphia Eagles. But when you look deeper into things, particularly through the use of Football Outsiders' DVOA stat, one sees just how similar these two teams are. For the uninitiated, here's the quick and dirty definition of DVOA:
DVOA is a method of evaluating teams, units, or players. It takes every single play during the NFL season and compares each one to a league-average baseline based on situation. DVOA measures not just yardage, but yardage towards a first down: five yards on third-and-4 are worth more than five yards on first-and-10 and much more than five yards on third-and-12. Red zone plays are worth more than other plays. Performance is also adjusted for the quality of the opponent. DVOA is a percentage, so a team with a DVOA of 10.0% is 10 percent better than the average team, and a quarterback with a DVOA of -20.0% is 20 percent worse than the average quarterback. Because DVOA measures scoring, defenses are better when they are negative.
For a further explanation of DVOA, check out this page from their site.
So, how does this help us look at this Sunday's matchup? Well, let's take a look.
According to DVOA, both the Eagles and Vikings have outstanding defenses. Philadelphia's defense was ranked third in the NFL by Football Outsiders against both the run and the pass, while the Vikings' defense was ranked fifth against the pass and fourth against the rush. Now, by the conventional stats, the Eagles are ranked roughly the same by yards allowed (3rd against the run, 4th against the rush) as their DVOA has them, but the Vikings (1st against the run, 18th against the pass in terms of yards allowed) get a significant boost as far as pass defense when the DVOA is taken into account.
Their numbers in pass defense are quite similar as well. . .and you can see what both teams will likely be attempting to attack on the opposing defense. Remember, when looking at DVOA in terms of defense, negative numbers are a good thing, while positive numbers are bad.
| Category | Eagles' DVOA (Rank) | Vikings DVOA (Rank) |
| vs. #1 WRs | -1.4% (13th) | -15.8% (5th) |
| vs. #2 WRs | -25.3% (3rd) | -30.9% (2nd) |
| vs. Other WRs | -51.1% (2nd) | -1.5% (20th) |
| vs. TEs | +6.9% (19th) | +18.0% (24th) |
| vs. RBs | +7.3% (18th) | +9.2% (22nd) |
So, as you can see, both teams are about equal in terms of defending opposing wide receivers. If my memory serves me correctly, the Vikings allowed three 100-yard receiving games all season, but only one of them was to a wide receiver, that being the 137-yard performance put together back in Week 2 by Indianapolis' Anthony Gonzalez. (The other 2 100-yard performances were Houston TE Owen Daniels and Jacksonville RB Maurice Jones-Drew).
But these numbers mean that there are three players on each particular team that everyone needs to pay attention to, as their successes or failures will more than likely dictate their team's success. On Philadelphia's side, the Vikings need to be supremely aware of the trifecta of Brian Westbrook, Correll Buckhalter, and L.J. Smith. For the Vikings, the keys will be the performances of Adrian Peterson, Chester Taylor, and the resurgent Visanthe Shiancoe. And I'm not going to lie to you, folks. . .Brian Westbrook scares the hell out of me in this match-up. He's probably the best pass-catching running back in the league, and the Vikings need to have somebody on him at all times, regardless of what kind of scheme they're going with. Chester Taylor is no slouch in his own right, but Westbrook is just in a class all by himself.
Both of these teams have solid, active secondaries, so I wouldn't expect either team's receivers to make a ton of noise in this one. But both of these defenses also struggle against tight ends and running backs, and both teams have the personnel on offense to exploit those weaknesses. It will be interesting to see how the teacher (Andy Reid) and the student (Brad Childress) attempt to go about making that happen this Sunday afternoon.
0 recs |
42 comments
|
Comments
The only reciever....
that has a slight chance against the Viking secondary is DeShaun “Drop The Ball on the One Yard Line” Jackson. I agree that Westbrook WILL pose a real problem, but I think pressure on the QB will be the great equalizer. If Allen and Edwards can get a jump on plays, I can really see them knocking a few passes out of the air and taking care of business.
I DO, however, believe that AP will rise to the occasion in his first playoff game. So players are destined to do well in the postseason, while other falter (i.e. Charles Barkley, Barry Bonds) hopefully AP is more Reggie Jackson than Dan Marino.
by allday-28 on Dec 31, 2008 8:45 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I Read That
Edwards might not play Sunday due to his injury and Robison will take his place. Anybody else have a confirmation on that?
by purplegrey on Dec 31, 2008 9:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I can't comfirm it
But I have read it in a couple places, including the NFCN blog at ESPN.
In AP I trust
by FarvaForTheVikings on Jan 1, 2009 5:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Its DeSean bro...
and pressure on our QB will greatly help you hurt our rhythem and it is something you guys should do, but (not trying to be a dick here) please, while i do fear and respect your D Line, our matchup against your secondary is more favorable.
Who wants to play Leapfrog with Trent?
by anuj on Jan 1, 2009 8:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Everybody thinks that, because we’re ranked pretty low against the pass and QBs put up big numbers. But they’re not as bad as people think. Cedric Griffin can be a liability in coverage, but when he mans up, he can shut people down. No offense, but we’ve taken on Steve Smith, Fitzgerald, Boldin, Andre Johnson, Greg Jennings, Reggie Wayne, and Calvin Johnson. And with the exception of Johnson, we shut all those recievers down for the most part. I doubt that Desean Jackson and Kevin Curtis are going to have a big day against the defense.
If anything, what I see killing us is a turnover returned for a TD. It’ll be a close game, I don’t see Peterson running for 100 yards, but I’m fairly sure our recievers are going to have a hard time getting open, and with the pressure Jackson’s gonna face, I can already see him throwing a few picks.
by Frost on Jan 1, 2009 10:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No offense, but we’ve taken on Steve Smith, Fitzgerald, Boldin, Andre Johnson, Greg Jennings, Reggie Wayne, and Calvin Johnson.
All #1’s or potential-to-be #1’s. Plaxico had a terrible year all things being considered, but guys like Hixon picked up big numbers early in the season for the Giants due to the fact that the Secondary’s they faced had to shade a safety over him for every game. I think the advantage for this game is that while Curtis and Jackson are good and are our go-to guys, we’ve had a lot of success with Avant and Baskett. In fact, I doubt there are many CBs that can match baskett in a foot race. I think the advantage for the Eagles will come when they exploit the weak points in the Vikes secondary and that comes from not running from the I-formation on passing downs and only utilizing 2 wrs and a TE. We’re going to be running a lot of 3 WR and 4 WR sets, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see westbrook start in the backfield and then either swing/wheel out or line up as a 5th wr all together. I’m not worried about the Viking pass rush. I’m sorry but I’m just not, in December (and lets be real that’s the only month that counts when looking at performance, see Cowboys) the Eagles O-Line has kept McNabb clean against heavy pass rushing teams. I’m not just talking about giving McNabb time, but if he can complete a 3-step drop he’ll put the ball on his receivers, and you don’t have the manpower or the ability in the secondary to cover 3 good receivers – we don’t have a true number one, but we’ve got plenty of #2’s, and so far that’s been good enough to get it done.
Yeah, I’m jawing a lot on your blog, I can’t help it. And if we lose, then I’ll come over and congratulate you on the win and wish you the best in the postseason – if I can do it for the cowboys when we lost to them in Week 2, I can do it for you without having to commit hari kari.
But lets be straight, I do not want a good game at all. And I won’t say that I do. I don’t understand when fellow Eagles – or Vikings fans – can say they want a good game, or think it will be. I want a massacre. I want the majority of the NFL audience to turn off the game at half time because the Eagles are up 56-9. I want it to look like a freight train hitting a van filled with puppies into a nursing home. I want dogs and cats living together – mass hysteria. I want the vikings to be playing their 3rd strength QB because T. Jackson is huddling in a corner of the Dome with Gus talking to a pack of string cheese because they have suffered traumatic stress from the Eagles Defensive onslaught.
I want the game to be so one sided and boring that I hope the owners of the Vikings burn down the Metrodome after the game because of the embarrassment thrust upon them at the hands Don and company. I want people in charge of the twin cities to issue a warning not to go out of their homes in fear that the Eagles secondary has continued into a mysterious 5th quarter and there are reports of Asante Samuel and Brian Dawkins carrying off small children and running them back for “touchdowns”. I want destruction, I want annihilation, I want complete catastrophe. I want to see Kevin Kolb at the start of the 3rd Quarter because we’re up 56-0 and the only reason the Offense is out is because we lost the coin toss at the start of the game, and the defense has been out for the entire first half due to their continued defensive scoring as the result of fumbles and interceptions.
I want to drink the tears of your fans when the Eagles advance to play the Giants after completely decimating the Vikings.
I don’t want a good game. I want to hear the announcer in the metrodome say “Finish him!” when the clock in the 4th quarter reads 00:01.
That’s what I want.
by thwalls on Jan 1, 2009 11:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Call me crazy
Yeah, I’m jawing a lot on your blog, I can’t help it. And if we lose, then I’ll come over and congratulate you on the win and wish you the best in the postseason – if I can do it for the cowboys when we lost to them in Week 2, I can do it for you without having to commit hari kari.
But I doubt this will happen.
I do, however, think that it’s funny that you seem to expect the Eagles to simply be able to toss their helmets out there this Sunday and beat the Vikings. The Vikings haven’t been “blown out” by anybody all season. . .I wouldn’t bet my next paycheck on the Eagles being the first.
Yeah, the Eagles have talent. . .they’re also 3-4-1 on the road, and in their last road game put up a blistering 3 points against a Redskins defense that is, quite frankly, not as good as Minnesota’s.
Anyone that’s anticipating a blowout in either direction on Sunday is, more than likely, going to be sorely disappointed.
The Daily Norseman - The greatest Vikings' site on the Internet!
by Gonzo on Jan 1, 2009 12:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh i defininatly do not this that the game will be a blowout. I voted that the eagles will win by a low margin. Do i think the eagles will win? yes. Am i confident, no not really. We have been prone to struggle on the road. But, if we can even come out with 3 of our 4 cylenders clicking, then i think we have the ariel talent to beat the secondary. Our offenses beauty is that we spread the ball around, so Donny can use our slot reciever to gash opponents or the screen with Westy or Buck. Do I wish that the game will be so one sided that the TV stations will black out the game for the nation? yes. Will it happen…. haha, i wish, but no. I don’t think any Eagle here is anticipating a blowout.
Who wants to play Leapfrog with Trent?
by anuj on Jan 1, 2009 2:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You can check the Bloggingtheboys.com blog, I most certainly congratulated them. And it got dicey for a week before that game. Furthermore I was making an attempt at humor.
But you can’t compare divisional opponents who we play twice a year to everybody else. Even when we’re doing really well, we never match up well against the redskins, which is something I will never understand. But by your based on strength of defense we should have been shut out by the Giants, Cowboys, and Chicago – all have better defenses than Washington. We dropped double digits on the Giants in both games, same with the cowboys, same with Chicago. Heck even when we lost to the giants and played terribly we still put 31 points on the board. So is it more likely that the Redskins game was anomalous or is it that the Eagles have a poor offense when it comes to “tough” defenses?
And would you ever bet your paycheck, your entire paycheck really.
by thwalls on Jan 1, 2009 2:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
do i smell
a bet?
Who wants to play Leapfrog with Trent?
by anuj on Jan 1, 2009 2:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
His Statement Was
“I wouldn’t bet my next paycheck on the Eagles being the first” meaning he wouldn’t do that if he were you. He never said anything about betting his paycheck.
by purplegrey on Jan 1, 2009 5:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Can I bet his paycheck? Or is would only count if he signed it over to me first and then I could bet it? Inquiring minds need to know!
I’m just joshing ya’.
by thwalls on Jan 2, 2009 7:55 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Eagles struggle against the Skins Nickle / Dime packages
Frankly their depth in the secondary gives the Eagles problems. They also have good coverage linebackers – London Fletcher has blanketed Westbrook the past couple years. The Skins see the Eagles twice a year so there is no system advantage for the Eagles like they have against other out of division opponents (and like they will have against the Vikings). Thus it comes down to coverage personnel and the skins enjoy an advantage here, especially against the Eagles spread package. Further, the Eagles screens never seem to work against the Skins – they’ve probably seen them so often that they know when their coming and how to defense them.
On offense, the Eagles can’t cover Cooley and the Skins power running game can give the Eagles fits. Usually the birds play the skins tough against the run in the first half, but then they start pounding with Portis and Betts and it really takes a toll. Defense can’t get off the field, McNabb does a couple 3 and outs and suddenly the game is over.
by CowboysSuck on Jan 2, 2009 1:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
sniff.... i think there are tears in my eyes
hear hear
But lets be straight, I do not want a good game at all. And I won’t say that I do. I don’t understand when fellow Eagles – or Vikings fans – can say they want a good game, or think it will be. I want a massacre. I want the majority of the NFL audience to turn off the game at half time because the Eagles are up 56-9. I want it to look like a freight train hitting a van filled with puppies into a nursing home. I want dogs and cats living together – mass hysteria. I want the vikings to be playing their 3rd strength QB because T. Jackson is huddling in a corner of the Dome with Gus talking to a pack of string cheese because they have suffered traumatic stress from the Eagles Defensive onslaught.
I want the game to be so one sided and boring that I hope the owners of the Vikings burn down the Metrodome after the game because of the embarrassment thrust upon them at the hands Don and company. I want people in charge of the twin cities to issue a warning not to go out of their homes in fear that the Eagles secondary has continued into a mysterious 5th quarter and there are reports of Asante Samuel and Brian Dawkins carrying off small children and running them back for "touchdowns". I want destruction, I want annihilation, I want complete catastrophe. I want to see Kevin Kolb at the start of the 3rd Quarter because we’re up 56-0 and the only reason the Offense is out is because we lost the coin toss at the start of the game, and the defense has been out for the entire first half due to their continued defensive scoring as the result of fumbles and interceptions.
I want to drink the tears of your fans when the Eagles advance to play the Giants after completely decimating the Vikings.
I don’t want a good game. I want to hear the announcer in the metrodome say "Finish him!" when the clock in the 4th quarter reads 00:01.
That’s what I want.
Who wants to play Leapfrog with Trent?
by anuj on Jan 1, 2009 2:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Need A Hankie?
LOL I don’t think there’s a fan on either side that doesn’t wish for their team to blow out the other. It is enough to make one misty eyed I guess.
by purplegrey on Jan 1, 2009 2:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Uncalled for
The Daily Norseman - The greatest Vikings' site on the Internet!
by Gonzo on Jan 1, 2009 5:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You're joking right?
I doubt there are many CBs that can match baskett in a foot race.
I don’t doubt that there are some grandmothers with speed as good as Hank Baskett’s.
by VikingBillArlingtonVA on Jan 4, 2009 12:09 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
One Thing
that people don’t take into account is the fact that many teams abandon the run against the Vikes and throw a lot more than usual. I don’t care how good someone’s secondary is, if you’re thrown against at an unusually high rate, your stats won’t look that impressive. Our pass defense is much better than the “stats” show.
by purplegrey on Jan 1, 2009 5:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually your passing defense stats aren’t that bad, which is pretty cool isn’t it? When you check out the stats including DVOA they’re a lot better then what NFL.com has you at.
by thwalls on Jan 2, 2009 7:58 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Come on BRO
I’m not one to comment here on the DN; but from what I’ve seen from you lately, you are the LAST person to point out a grammar mistake/misspell and I hate to say it but your kind of annoying Dr. “not trying to be a dick” SKOL VIKES!!!
by MiNnAZona MDG on Jan 1, 2009 5:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
our line has given up 23 sacks the entire year. We’ve faced Pit, Dal and Bal all top 3 sack teams and had no trouble protecting the QB.
Also, our DVOA on D might be the same but Vikes offense just isn’t good enough
E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES!!!
by Joe_D on Jan 1, 2009 5:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If I Remember Correctly...
You lost 3 out of 4 to those teams…true, you were outscored in the 1st Dallas game but where was your offense in the other two?
by purplegrey on Jan 1, 2009 5:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
whre has your offense been the whole season?
Yes our offense can be VERY streaky. No argument there.
We also beat Pit, Dal, and NYG.. I just don’t think the Vikings will have enough offense to overcome the birds defense.
E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES!!!
by Joe_D on Jan 1, 2009 6:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Showing Up...
when it has to. I wish I could come up with some mindboggling stat or make some excuse as to why we haven’t put up big numbers but I can’t. We are what we are but you’re relying on your offense to play a perfect game. You’re taking for granted that our defense isn’t good enough to stop your offense. If you look at our losses, special team letdowns and turnovers have played a huge part in all of them, mostly at the beginning of the season. We were 1-3 in the 1st four games but rallied to go 9-3 the rest of the way (7-2 the last 9). We have been in a position to win every game we lost. This game won’t be decided by stats. It’ll be decided by intangibles and nothing down on paper will disprove that. You say our offense isn’t good enough but try telling that to the 10 teams we’ve beaten this year along with the ones who had to sweat out last second wins against us. Here’s to a good game. SKOL!
by purplegrey on Jan 1, 2009 6:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Our defense in december has
only let up 10 puts a game. Our defense is the best in the NFC and righ tnow perhaps NFL. Defense wins championships and thats what I think it’s going to come down to.
E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES!!!
by Joe_D on Jan 1, 2009 6:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It's January
I’m not trying to down your defense but you’re knocking an offense that hasn’t been held to single digits all year and except for the Tennessee game (we were in that one til a late interception deep in our own territory sealed it) hasn’t lost by more than 7 points. I kind of agree with you that defense wins championships and in most cases that’s so, however the Vikings had the #1 defense in the league for most of the late 60’s on into the 70’s and you know how many Super Bowls they won? I don’t have to answer that….
by purplegrey on Jan 1, 2009 7:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You played Washington and Cleveland, and Dallas was doing its best to stab itself. I’ll give you the Giants game, but that’s iffy because they didn’t have Burress. Washington and Cleveland weren’t exactly high-flying offenses in December, especially the Browns, having both first and second string QBs out. So your defense’s stats are a bit inflated this month. Just saying.
by Frost on Jan 2, 2009 12:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Speaking of dropping the ball on the 1-yard line
…did anyone else think AP had thrown the ball a bit early on Sunday? My brother and I could not believe that none of the announcers said anything about it. We watched it over and over again on rewind/digital cable, and could not tell definitively from the angle.
I made fun of Plaxico for years after he spiked his first NFL catch without being down by contact. I felt bad about judging him so much on 1 play long ago as he helped the Giants win the Super Bowl, so I forgave him. Then he shot himself in the foot again (literally this time) a few weeks ago…so I’m out of the business of reading too much into a play like that from now on.
by KC Viking on Jan 1, 2009 8:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Early drop
There were other sites that commented on the ‘early drop’ by Peterson. One stated that they thought the TD might have been overturned if challenged. I never saw a video of the correct angle, and since it isn’t being shown on the highlight shows, it must not have been that close.
Why doesn’t he do what Randy Moss usually did, toss the ball to some kid in the crowd. You never heard the announcers talk about that kind act by #84.
by DBQViking on Jan 1, 2009 9:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Moss
I’m sure he did a lot of good while in MN (charity, etc.), and it is too bad that a few negative incidents are always going to stand out in most peoples’ minds more than the positive ones. Most NFL players do, even the obscure ones who earn less than a million per year, so there are tons of untold feel-good stories out there every year. Maybe guys like Moss don’t deserve to have theirs told as much as someone else who gave a bigger chunk of his income AND was a better citizen by example, too.
by KC Viking on Jan 3, 2009 10:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I honestly cannot wait for thy game
Gonzo2
by Gonzo2 on Dec 31, 2008 9:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
The Vikings will play lots of nickel
even on obvious running downs as you don’t want to have Westbrook matched up on a linebacker.
by VikingBillArlingtonVA on Jan 1, 2009 4:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Definitely.
I don’t see them allowing the Eagles to exploit the Westbrook v. LB matchup the way we did against the Giants. I figured that with your defense you would let your DLineman do all the heavy lifting and then have a “bend-but-not-break” approach to Eagles short passing attack which is customary of WC offense. I figured we’d see a lot of Dime, nickel, or a modified base defense with 3 down lineman and a joker.
by thwalls on Jan 2, 2009 8:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Westbrook is far more dangerous as a receiver
than as a runner. Just as the Iggles will line up consistently with 8 in the box to thwart AD so will the Vikings use nickel and dime packages to make sure a db is shadowing Westbrook.
I look for a close game decided by: 1) turnover differential and 2) the ability of the Vikings to pressure McNabb. If Reid is smart he’ll double J. Allen all day and make some of the other guys like Robison and K. Williams get the pressure. I don’t look for Frazier to blitz all that much given Westbrook’s abilities on the hot read throws.
by VikingBillArlingtonVA on Jan 2, 2009 11:50 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Last week Demarcus Ware was a ghost
Demarcus Ware >>> Jared Allen
Tre Thomas did a great job on Ware in the friendly confines of Lincoln Financial Field. They did chip Ware sometimes so I expect that they’ll do the same with Allen. Allen doesn’t worry me, Tre Thomas can handle him. What worries me (as an Eagles fan) is the defensive tackles collapsing the pocket, not allowing McNabb to step up.
Vikings appear to have an advantage in the interior and this is the real key to the game. Forget about Allen being a decisive factor, if the Vikings win it will be because of their defensive tackles.
by CowboysSuck on Jan 2, 2009 1:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Its Tra bro
and i dunno. For a LB, DeMarcus Ware is steller, but Jared Allen is one of the top, if not the top DE in this league. Still, I think Tra can handle Allen. If “Phat Pat” is out, that will be a great help to our line. The Pat brothers and Allen would put tremendous pressure on our line that has some fairly young spots and hinder McNabb from getting into a rhythem.
Who wants to play Leapfrog with Trent?
by anuj on Jan 2, 2009 2:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
TJ the Difference
Their is no secret to the Vikes’ offense and that is Adrian Petersen. You can expect to see the Eagles put 8 men in the box all game long in an effort to force the Vikes into third and long situations. This is the approach most teams take agaisnt the Vikings but Petersen is good enough to still be productive. However, the Eagles run defense is solid enough that it should be able to contain Petersen. I wouldn’t be suprised to see some screen passes early in the game to keep the Eagles’ blitz packages off balance. As most people have recognized, this game will be decided by the play of Tarvaris Jackson. He is prone to mental miscues. I know he has been playing solid as of late, but I am not sure he is capable of handling a defense as aggresive as the Birds.
On another note, what is up with the lack of a sellout? I am from Philly so I ask in all seriousness. It’s been something like 11 years since the last game was blacked out in your neck of the woods—why all the sudden with a playoff game?
Chris Iafolla http://heardinthecheapseats.com/
by Chris Iafolla on Jan 3, 2009 2:18 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Who knows. Times are definitely harder. But we didn’t need corporate help this time, so that’s a good sign at least.
by Frost on Jan 3, 2009 11:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

by 
















