How to improve the Vikings' defensive backfield?

by KC Viking on Oct 9, 2009 8:31 PM CDT

Overall, the Minnesota Vikings' defense has played well so far, ranking in the top 10 in yards per attempt, least time of possession allowed, fewest 1st downs, 3rd down % allowed and several rushing categories. They are 17th in points allowed (t-20th in TD passes allowed, 1st in rushing TDs allowed), 14th in yards allowed (10th in rushing yards allowed). Aside from defensive penalty yards (228, 26th), most of their rankings are good overall, but the pass defense is still their weakness. Stats, rankings and possible suspects will be discussed after the jump.

More passing defensive stats and rankings:

Sacks: 16, 1st
Rating: 84.6, 17th
Comp%: 63%, 24.5th
TDs allowed: 21.5
Yds/Comp: 11.7, 20.5th
Yds/Att: 7.4, 22.5th
AY/A: 6.1, 14.5th
ANY/A: 4.8, 8.5th
1stD%: 32.3, 11th
PD: 18, 28.67th
20+ yd passes allowed: 13, 23rd
40+ yd passes allowed: 1, 11.5th
Opp offensive rank (pyds): 19th
Opp offensive rank (rating): 18.75th
Opp offensive rank (passing ANY/A): 21st

Overall (by these rankings): 17.5th

(Stat I wish I had: opponents' 2nd half passing attempts and production numbers.)

The fact that the Vikings have played slightly below average pass defense vs. mediocre or worse teams which have combined for a 6-10 record so far is troubling, and perhaps it's time to think about making a change or two. Which defensive backs are performing well, and who is not?

Try to guess who owns each stat line:
a) 0 INT, 0 PD, 0 FF, 0 FR, 0 Sacks
b) 1 INT, 4 PD, 0 FF, 0 FR, 0 Sacks
c) 2 INT, 2 PD, 1 FF, 0 FR, 0 Sacks
d) 0 INT, 1 PD, 0 FF, 1 FR, 1 Sack
e) 2 INT, 3 PD, 0 FF, 2 FR, 0 Sacks
f) 0 INT, 2 PD, 0 FF, 0 FR, 0 Sacks

Can you guess who did what?

Player (a) is the high-salaried veteran safety, Madieu Williams. He has fewer stats defending the pass than DT Kevin Williams (d) or the first-year starter on the other side of the field, Tyrell Johnson (f) or OLB Chad Greenway (e), who has better stats against the pass than both TW and MW put together. Player (b) is Antoine Winfield, and player (c) is Cedric Griffin. What greater sign of poor play in the Vikings' secondary could there be other than Cedric Griffin having the second-best stat line after 4 games against mediocre to awful teams?

Tyrell Johnson is young enough to improve and step up at some point, although that is not guaranteed to happen. Madieu Williams

Football Outsiders recently published DVOA rankings for defensive efficiency from the first 4 weeks. Minnesota's secondary ranked in the top 10 by the graphs I saw, but a glance at which WRs were defended well above or below average (scroll down) showed that #1 WRs were defended 5th best in the league (-50something%) while the other side was 10 points higher (bad, meaning more scoring) than the average. Whomever covered #2 WRs for the Vikings ranked 19th among those who cover #2 WRs (51st overall). I'm guessing that that guy is Cedric Griffin, who was listed as a FS in nfldraftscout.com/USAToday's 2006 draft preview.

Theoretically, it could make sense to move Cedric Griffin to FS, draw straws for Madieu Williams or Tyrell Johnson at SS, and start Asher Allen or Tyrell Johnson at CB2. What changes do you want to see in the Vikings' secondary?

Poll

What changes are necessary for the Vikings to improve their secondary?

No changes are necessary. The Football Fairy will leave the answers under Cedric Griffin's ginormous cushion while he's passed out.

21 votes

Madieu Williams should lose his job, at least for a week or two.

17 votes

Tyrell Johnson should sit for 3 years like Aaron Rodgers did. How can any NFL team expect young players to perform without coddling them for 3 years?

4 votes

I don't know, but nothing should be changed until the team is playing meaningful games.

21 votes

Surely there is someone available via trade.

27 votes

90 votes | Poll has closed

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.

Tweet Comment 29 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

im confused?

with wat u think we should do

by vikesfan4lyf on Oct 9, 2009 9:56 PM CDT via mobile reply actions

I voted for the last option, and I’m all for sitting 1-2 vs. StL when the stakes are low.

by KC Viking on Oct 10, 2009 4:19 PM CDT up reply actions

Yeah we need to get our pass defense figured out. It seems to be a major weakness in our D. If we get it figured out, we will be very tough to beat.

by dsludo on Oct 9, 2009 11:18 PM CDT reply actions

i personally dont think anything is wrong with the pass d. i do think its way better now then wat we had two years ago.

but most teams have a weakness somewhere and our weakness technically isnt that weak

by vikesfan4lyf on Oct 9, 2009 11:36 PM CDT via mobile reply actions

2 years ago (2007)

was an awful year vs. the pass. No Viking had more than 5 sacks that year, and the team had played a full season against at least a few decent or better passing teams.

In 4 games this season, JA already has 6.5 sacks, and the team has almost half as many in 1/4 season as the 2008 team had in a full season. The Vikings SHOULD have much better pass defense stats to date in 2009 because they have only played easy opponents (with the possible exception of SF, who may still prove to be nothing more than mediocre over the long haul). When the Vikings play better teams, the same pass defense will almost certainly play worse than their current below average performance vs. terrible competition (6-10).

by KC Viking on Oct 10, 2009 10:45 PM CDT up reply actions

Have you watched the games?

The vikings now have a high scoring offense. We get ahead and then let the other team play catchup in garbage time while we play prevent defense. That is where alot of the pass yardage and points comes from.

http://vikingsmashfootball.wordpress.com/

by BeardedAxe on Oct 11, 2009 11:23 AM CDT up reply actions

Yes, I've seen all of them.

They SHOULD score a ton of points against the likes of Cleveland or any of the team’s they’ve played so far. It’s not like the Vikes shredded good and bad teams alike as NO did vs. the Lions (45-27) and vs. a good team like the Eagles (48-22). The Saints were ahead in those games, yet the Lions scored no points in the 4th qtr while the Eagles scored a measley 2 points in the 4th qtr of that game. I expect to see performances like that from any team that truly has a high-powered offense and legit defense.

by KC Viking on Oct 11, 2009 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions

You just spread sunshine wherever you go...

I expect to see performances like that from any team that truly has a high-powered offense and legit defense

I guess the Vikes will just have to hobble along as best they can with what they can cobble together, and we’ll just pray for the best…

< /sarcasm >

Ah, ah,
We come from the land of the ice and snow,
From the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.
The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new lands,
To fight the horde, singing and crying: Valhalla, I am coming!
SKOL!

by DCPurple on Oct 12, 2009 1:02 AM CDT up reply actions

Yeah, that's what I was thinking

I would like to see what the stats are when we are up by < 2 scores.

Still, I share your general unease. Things can change later (concerns about O line may return), but right now the secondary feels like the most likely Achilles heel. Not to put the cart too far before the horse, but I shudder to think of facing Saints in the playoffs, or Colts in Superbowl.

by puddnhead on Oct 12, 2009 8:26 AM CDT up reply actions

To be clear though

I don’t think there is ANY team that does not have an “Achilles heel” That is what NFL parity is all about; no team can just buy championships like the Yankees (try to) do. Well, not til next year at least, when the cap may disappear :(

We are fortunate that we have Achilles heel(s) only (still not sold on O-line …). There are teams with Achilles feet (Packers, Patriots), legs (Cowboys), torsos (Rams), and even Achilles full bodies (Raiders).

by puddnhead on Oct 12, 2009 8:48 AM CDT up reply actions

Hey, it's better than it has been

Rodgers probably contributed to those numbers on Monday, when he was both running and throwing for his life. He racked up almost 400 yards. Once again, it’ll be our D-line that saves our ass. That, and Chad Greenway.

by virginia viking on Oct 10, 2009 6:41 AM CDT reply actions

There were a couple HUGE missed tackles that let receivers get long gains.

by Salty on Oct 10, 2009 9:58 AM CDT up reply actions

To be fair, our pass defense is head and shoulders above what it was last year. But there is certainly room for improvement.

We lead the league in sacks, so I doubt the issue is our pass rush.

Most of our yards given up look to have been right in the seam where EJ and Chad pass the reciever/tight end off to the safety. With a slower/stronger MLB like EJ, I think this is something that is purely scheme-related. EJ is a beast, we all know that. But he has to be one of the slower LBs in the league (considering his Madden ratings… har har). That would mean he has to release the receiver to the next defender faster than other LBs in their zone.

It would not be good for us to pull a safety down to make up for EJ’s relatively short zone coverage ability because that would leave us more vulnerable to the deep pass.

So, I think we are stuck with that area of the field being an issue until we can scheme against it.

by Bjorno on Oct 10, 2009 11:11 AM CDT reply actions

As long as we stop teams in the redzone, I don’t care so much if we give up 500 yards through the air.

by Frost on Oct 10, 2009 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions

red zone

But do you think that stopping Cleveland in the red zone will be the same as stopping a real team in the red zone?

Personally, I can’t imagine why the Vikings would be just as likely to stop BAL or PIT or NYG or ARI in the red zone as CLE and DET.

by KC Viking on Oct 10, 2009 10:49 PM CDT up reply actions

I think Anthony21 put it well yesterday in his post

It wasn’t so much us who stopped the Rams in the red zone, it was the rams who stopped themselves.

by puddnhead on Oct 12, 2009 8:28 AM CDT up reply actions

Greenway

On two of the seam passes that the Packers TE burned us on, it looked to me like the problem was Greenway. One one, the TE lined up off tackle as a flanker with 3 WR on the other side. The RB ran a route to the flat on Greenway’s side. Both Winfield and Greenway went to cover the RB in the flat and the TE run up the seam uncovered. Big playfor Pack, but fortunately Allen forced a funble shortly thereafter. Greenway was signaling to Winfield before the play — so it appears to have been a miscommunication. If it was a zone D, I think the error was on greenway, but who knows?

On another seem route Greenway was just way too late in getting over there.

On the goal line 4th and 1, Greenway had the TE in man defense. Greenway hit the TE right off the line, and the TE shoved Greenway to the ground and turned to his left waited for Rodgers to find his WIDE OPEN TE in the end zone on 4th and one. Rodgers did, Greenway scrambled to ge back up and dove towards Lee, but was to late to defend the pass. Then the football gods threw a bolt at Lee and he dropped the pass.

Greenway got burned on 2 big screen passes for the Pack as well.

Greenway has been great on run defense for the past 2 years. His pass defense has been hit or miss at best — mostly miss. He seems better on man coverage (except for that goal line play), but that is not what the Vikes usually play.

I agree on some of the seem routes in earlier games, it looked like Henderson just got beat — but it’s hard to tell if the safety was negligent for not giving help sooner. I’d like to know what Frazier thinks. Can someone just call him up and ask him and tell us what he says?

TiggerSr

by TiggerSr on Oct 10, 2009 1:35 PM CDT up reply actions

Heh, that would be too easy.

You can’t fault Greenway for getting pancaked, it happens even to the better LB’s out there if they are not set properly.

That might explain why we send Madieu into the short zone on some plays, to cover for Greenway’s lagging pass D.

by Bjorno on Oct 10, 2009 4:06 PM CDT up reply actions

7 votes for a trade?

Did you guys forget we have 2 young talents in Asher Allen and Jamarca Sanford, both of which could step up and provide some help?

by Bjorno on Oct 10, 2009 4:07 PM CDT reply actions

But are they ready?

We don’t know if they’re the next big thing or the next Marcus McCauley at this point, and I doubt Chilly has free reign to experiment with rookies with such a high payroll for veteran players.

by KC Viking on Oct 10, 2009 10:51 PM CDT up reply actions

Asher Allen is no McCauley

We saw Asher display football skills in preseason — aggressiveness and tackling — that McCauley never showed.

Asher Allen shows real promise as a Winfield-type corner, something you could NEVER say about McCauley. He will be ready when Winfield retires. He is not now. He needs to learn now. My bet is he will take over the nickel from Sapp next year.

TiggerSr

by TiggerSr on Oct 10, 2009 11:19 PM CDT up reply actions

Allen is legit. He is a primarily man coverage guy so fitting him into our zone scheme might be a bit of a transition, but this kid is smart and hits pretty hard.

Jamarca Sanford is going to be a name that is said pretty often in coming years.

by Bjorno on Oct 11, 2009 2:51 AM CDT up reply actions

I’d love to hear the coach’s assessment on how those two are doing, we’ve heard nothing about them lately.

Another person I’m starting to wonder about is Rosenfels, he’s been on the injured list for 6 weeks now

by DCPurple on Oct 12, 2009 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions

don't forget

some of the D’s numbers are skewed…in that TO’s and ST’s points are leveled against them…so they are better at holding down the other teams score…and the big thing is how well they defend on 3rd downs…which are passing downs…they are much better prepared to stop a team from getting that 1st down.
Of course many teams are passing on 1st and 2nd downs…but when the D knows it is a throwing down they seem to be more up to the challenge to stop them.
The O also has some say in the D’s stats in that they control the clock leaving less chances for the other teams O to be on the field.
Overall I think the D is solid and plays the pass well when it counts….in the red zone.

by vikefan1969 on Oct 11, 2009 8:07 AM CDT reply actions

Added

It seems that the best bet is also not to try and blitz the QB…seems that is when Rodgers made them pay…I would rather see them fall back into coverage…and I will add it is that we also play the run 1st that often hurts the pass D as well.

by vikefan1969 on Oct 11, 2009 8:13 AM CDT reply actions

Well, not every time has an o-line as bad as the Pack. Without pressure, any QB can kill you, even Bollinger. If you have to blitz to get pressure, then you beter blitz at least some of the time. The key is to disguise the blitz well. Either we did not disguise it well, or Rodgers was really good at reading the blitz and buring it (or the Pack had the right plas called on most of the blitzes).

TiggerSr

by TiggerSr on Oct 11, 2009 9:45 AM CDT up reply actions

I'm thinking the opposite

The Vikings Pass defense has not struggled. Yeah, they are going to get beat from time to time,these are highly talented professionals they’re stopping. Most of these stats can be altered significantly with one big play and then your talking about how high they are up on the stat board. These guys aren’t getting opportunities to get PD’s because our D-line isn’t giving the opposing teams quarterback time. I like the comparisons using stats, but from the naked eye, I believe we’ve performed well. This week you can argue that its a lower competition, but using our opponents records after 4 weeks is pre-mature. SKOL

by PurpleJesuZ on Oct 11, 2009 10:50 AM CDT reply actions

No.

They have not played a team of highly talented professionals. They made the Lions and Browns appear to have better passing games than they really do.

by KC Viking on Oct 11, 2009 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions

the passing game is always going to be our week point

And that is solely because we are made as a run defense team. We’re damn good at it to, so teams must pass against us. When you think about that then you realize that no matter what happens we will get passed on. Yeah, I agree we could be better but if you look at our backfirld most of them are solid run defense players that includes our line backers. When you push for one thing so hard it’s going to have a causal affect on the rest of your game. Same issue with had on offense with our line and pass plays. they were set up to run the ball starting the passing game was a paradime shift and caused problems.

The thing is it is pretty recognized in the NFL that if you want to win championships you have to run the ball. Since we do run well and we stop it I think Chilly believes that will help us get to the big dance.

by Grime on Oct 12, 2009 9:37 AM CDT reply actions