I might be alone on this...
but I think the problem isn't T-Jack, a young guy who has shown a lot of ability and potential. The problem is Chillly's conservative play calling. We saw it at the beginning of the season against Green Bay and Indy, when Jackson was only throwing in third and long situations. As Gonzo said himself, how do you expect a quarterback to get a rhythm with his receivers if he's only throwing 7 passes in a half? The big change in Jackson from the first set of games to those that at the end of the season was that Childress opened the play book.
Against the Eagles, we saw the same restricted play book from Childress, only a few deep passes and mostly short passes and screens. To me, it shows a lack of trust and confidence from Childress. Jackson was tearing it up at the end of regular season, but as soon as they get into the playoffs, they close the playbook up and try to limit the mistakes.
At the time of Jackson's ill-advised interception that was run back for a TD, he had thrown 14 passes. According to NFL.com's breakdown, Jackson had thrown 13 short passes to 1 deep pass. Breaking it down further, Jackson had thrown 3 short middle, 3 short left, and 1 deep left, and SEVEN short right. Half of all his passes at that point were being thrown short right. Admittedly, it wasn't a great throw, but if you throw 50% of your passes to one area of the field, it doesn't matter if you're Asante Samuel or Fred Smoot, you're going to wise up and start watching that area. Ok. Maybe not Fred Smoot, but you get my point.
At the end of the day, Jackson had thrown 37 passes, including two penalties. He threw 7 short left, 7 short middle, 3 deep left, 3 deep right, and 16 short right. A combined 7 deep passes? In 37 attempts? So much for stretching the field. I get that a lot of the short passes are the results of check downs, where he looks to the Berrian and Rice and checks down to Taylor and Shiancoe. But how many were designed plays? And if Jackson is forced to constantly check down, is that his fault or the receivers?
And just one last point... correct me if I'm wrong, but we aren't a passing team, we're a running team --> that being said, why did Childress have T-Jack throw the ball 37 times, and not even give AD the ball in the vikings last 16 offensive plays?
This FanPost was created by a registered user of The Daily Norseman, and does not necessarily reflect the views of the staff of the site. However, since this is a community, that view is no less important.
0 recs |
15 comments
Comments
Giants-Eagles - Eli Manning
I’m sure many of you are watching the Giants-Eagles game. Based on this game, can anyone against Tjack stop using the playoff game as an example of why TJ is not the answer?
Eli Manning – 3.5 quarters: 10/22, 127 yards, 0 td, 1 int, 45.1 rating
Maybe the Eagles have a pretty good pass defense that is clicking right now, and maybe that had a lot to do with Tjack’s performance last week. Now, I admit I missed the first three quarters, but since I got home I haven’t seen Tom Coughlin call a single passing play for Eli. It almost looks like they’re scared to do it.
by cheaptoy on Jan 11, 2009 3:05 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Teams lose.
T-Jack has unfairly taken the brunt of the criticism for the teams performance in the playoff game, but there is an argument for having him replaced. It is too bad the discussion has focused solely the performance of a quarterback who’s started only 20-23 games in his career rather than the urgency of the situation the organization finds itself in.
The Vikings are built to win now and T-Jack has not played championship caliber football (I don’t expect him to at this point in his career!). With that said, the Vikes didn’t have a quarterback on the roster that gave them a good chance to win.
The window will not be open forever and the chances of a team staying young and healthy aren’t very good.
by LoveHate on Jan 11, 2009 3:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
He definitely didn’t play at a championship caliber, but he definitely showed some major improvment in the last few weeks of the season. I’m being optimistic that it was true improvement that will carry into next season, since the way I see it, barring some small miracle solution, he’s the best option right now. Hopefully, ole Super Bowl winner Eli Manning’s performance today will get the “Tjack is so terrible, look how he played in the playoffs!” people to keep quiet.
I know NFL windows aren’t huge, but I do think the Vikings have a slightly larger window than most teams because of the relatively young age of their core superstars.
by cheaptoy on Jan 11, 2009 3:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The whole urgency argument
Couldn’t even be made before this season. The additions of Allen and Berrian make the ‘Win Now’ talk appropriate. The roster could still get better. And I agree, they are in position to be good for some time.
by LoveHate on Jan 11, 2009 3:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Built to Win
That’s why I think that if the Vikes had a chance to pick up a hot top-caliber QB, even if it costs through the nose, they need to do it. They need to fill 2 positions, the QB and a #1WR, to make a serious Super Bowl run. To me, that means that if they need to open the purse strings and forgoe the top picks for a couple years, DO IT. The replacements will more than cover the cost over time, and their time is now. And it’s not like, if they get to the Super Bowl, their top picks will be worth a huge amount anyway.
by DCPurple on Jan 12, 2009 10:06 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
What happened at halftime?
I’ve been thinking all week that T-Jack played well the first half (minus the pick) and looked relatively comfortable in face of all those blitzes. Then came halftime, he comes out and looks like that “deer in the headlights” lost player from the first two games.
My question is:
What happened at halftime? What did Chili say to him? Or was it Bevell or the QB coach? Something happened.
It may take a village to raise a child, but it takes a Viking to raze a village.
by Luft Krigare on Jan 11, 2009 4:54 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
If you think it is not tjack read this from the Star trib
But former Eagles quarterback Ron Jaworski, an ESPN analyst, studied Jackson on film and said he still sees too many youthful mistakes.
“At times you see him do things that give me hope and think that he’s getting better,” Jaworski said. "But sometimes you see decisions he makes or throws that he makes and you go, ‘Oh boy.’ At this point in his career, that shouldn’t be happening. … I still don’t see a quarterback that sees the full field.
“I think their passing concepts are very simple. I doubt the whole playbook is being used.”
This is what a pro qb and expert, said of your tjack.
by vikefansd on Jan 11, 2009 7:16 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
lol Yeah, and the same Pro QBs and experts probably said that the Cardinals wouldn’t make it to the NFC Champ game, let alone be hosting it. Honestly, you have to take what these guys, especially ESPN analysts, say with a grain of salt. Yes, Jackson has made dumb mistakes. Is Jaworski going to say that Jake Delhomme isn’t ready to be a good QB because he threw 5 picks against the Cardinal’s defense? The same defense Jackson torched for 4 TDs.
I just don’t think anyone’s really seen enough of him to get a good judgement of how he’s really progresssed. To judge him so quickly, I’ll admit I did it also, off one post-season game against a pretty good blitzing defense though is sort of dumb. I mean, the three weeks before the Eagle game, he really wasn’t terrible at all, and that was against 3 playoff teams.
by Frost on Jan 11, 2009 7:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
no
tjack is not ready. You watch his game when they is pressure he throw to his check down and ignore down the field. I don’t think he is just looking at one game. DB jumping the route and he can see it. I coach tennis and when you play double some time you have to go down the line to keep the net man honest. Otherwise they cheat. In any sport you have to do that. Just like a pitcher even if his fast ball is not that good. but he have to throw in the change up, to keep batter of balance. Basketball any sport. In sport defense have to cheat other wise they will lose on the play.
When you are in front it is easy to play if you make a mistake it is ok. The test of a good qb is when he is from behind. Now i think tjack if he sit and learn it will be better for him. He has all the tool, but not the exprience. He need to go to the film room and watch good qb and how they call formation and protection schemme. Tjack is not ready.
by vikefansd on Jan 11, 2009 7:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Come on..............
He does that to everybody, what about the wins against : Lions,Cardinal,and the Giants i guess he didn’t see the whole field then either! T-Jack will be alright.
MDK
by PAtxMADDENKING on Jan 11, 2009 11:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, it’s a real chicken and egg kind of thing isn’t it? Who sucks? Just Childress, just Jackson, both of them? Oh the confusion!
Should it really be this hard?
Seems that if Jackson can’t read defensive coverages that well (which he can’t) a good coach could figure something out. But is there anything that can be done when your QB doesn’t recognize coverages and find open receivers easily? I don’t know, I’m just a fan not a coach, so I’m really asiking.
Seems also that Childress tries to stretch the field at times by throwing the long ball, but these plays rarely connect so the defense just needs to stop those couple of long attempts per game and the rest is easy for them. So when you try to shorten the throws, the defense gets to creep up a little closer to the line and then your running game suffers too. It’s a conundrum.
When I watch a Vikings game, I usually know what’s coming from our offense. Not all the time of course, but pretty often. If I know it, all those defensive coaches and players who get paid to defend know it too. So whether it’s Childress or Jackson or the combination of the two, we aren’t that scary when a competent defense faces us. And oddly enough, even when a fairly incompetent one faces us (Detroit, Green Bay) we still have problems. What the hell are we gonna do about this futility?
by Bodysuit Man on Jan 11, 2009 10:11 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Unfortunately Bodysuit Man, futility will probably be around for at least one more year...
…unless we sacrifice our draft for another premium player, which I think we will do. The Wilfs’ got a small taste of the playoffs and I believe they will open their wallets one more time.
"Skol pa fiskande"
by NobleSavage on Jan 12, 2009 9:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

by 

















