are we peaking to early
by montana vikes fan on Nov 3, 2009 1:07 PM CST
48 comments
Our offense seems to be hitting on all cylinders 30.5 pts per game a lot of points with out a lot of yards....I like. Has this unit hit its peak? An injury to a key player I will not name (I hate to say things like that out loud) could change this in a hurry. A balanced attack with no one player getting all the yards. This is as good a balanced teams as I have seen.
If the O has not peaked what would get better?
The D has not played great, to me this is not so bad. I hope this unit starts to peak with a playoff push in December. It seems odd that they dominate early, I am not sure what the heck is going on there.
So how good can this D be? What would it take to reach the full potential?
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 |
48 comments
| Add comment
Email
Print
Comments
we haven't even played as good as we are capable of
which gets me really excited :)
Vikings 4 the superbowl
by RaysOfHope on Nov 3, 2009 1:27 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
Sullivan and Loadholt still have a ways to go and improving. The D still has to iron out the 2nd half collapses but the way they nutted up in the last of the 4th against the Packers, I think they will improve as well. Then watch out.
"That is the craziest sonofabitch I ever saw, how many more like him do you think are up there?"
by VikesFaninNM on Nov 3, 2009 7:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ditto
I see continued improvement on both offense and defense, we haven’t peaked yet. When we have two games where there’s no further progress, that’s probably the peak.
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 Nov 4, 2009 11:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Both units have areas to improve in. The offense has put up bunches of points, but (outside of GB II) faded late in a number of games. B. Berrian came into the season as the undisputed #1 and has to this point been the fourth option in the passing game. Last season he led the league in pass recs 20+ yards. That phase of the passing game still needs to develop. The running game hasn’t been what we’ve all come to expect, though the balance has been inspirational.
The Defense…well, needs work.
by LoveHate on Nov 3, 2009 1:31 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
The Defense needs Winfield back, then i think they will be fine
Vikings 4 the superbowl
by RaysOfHope on Nov 3, 2009 1:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think the team believes they've put in a complete effort yet.
Still have some things to ‘work on’ and make corrections.
*Pass protection was weak at the start, but run blocking was very good.
*Pass protection has improved and run blocking has suffered some.
*Favre and Berrian have yet to fully get ‘on the same page’ like Harvin, Rice, and Shiancoe have.
*3rd/4th quarter defensive ‘swoons’ – is this opposition adjustments? Mental/physical resting?
*Fully gel as a defensive unit so all 3 levels are operating as a single unit.
Just my opinion on where the team sits.
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Nov 3, 2009 1:45 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
The
3rd/4th quarter defensive collapses are the most concerning in my opinion. We have to quit doing that.
by All Day, All Night on Nov 4, 2009 11:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Percy is a beast
i was so sick of our special teams the last 5 years or so, but Percy makes it very exciting
Vikings 4 the superbowl
by RaysOfHope on Nov 3, 2009 2:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
"We're used to Favre-a-palooza now. We're engulfed in Favre-a-palooza. It's not even Favre-a-palooza anymore. He's family now."
--Vikings TE Visanthe Shiancoe, on Brett Favre
by MilCardFan on Nov 3, 2009 4:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Two new starting offensive line men haven't completely "gelled"
Plus the rotational guys on the D-Line and sub DBs (Sapp, Allen, and Paymah) are improving. Barring any key injuries this team will only get better. The only real concern is that FARVE might be peaking too early and may fade at the end of the year.
by ChemErik on Nov 3, 2009 5:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I've never understood this "peaking too early" concept
so i have no idea what to say to you. by this logic, packers were better off than us sunday because we peaked in first half, and they in 2nd
by puddnhead on Nov 3, 2009 10:45 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
peaking
It may be a false concept, but it seems that teams that go far in the playoffs play their best football later in the year. For instance putting together a complete D games. But this may be completely false due to a lot of factors. The teams played at the end of the year, injuries, etc. What I would look for in our team would be not giving up the big plays on D, much less in the way of penalties, and a low percentage of 3rd down conversion. If the D starts playing whole games like that I would say there are playing close to their potential. The question is can they continue to play at that high of a level and for how long. This may be determined by the opponents we face as much as anything.
it is better to be thought of as dumb then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Ben Franklin
by montana vikes fan on Nov 4, 2009 9:33 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
peaking too early
merely means that you give teams more game film of you working at your best. That gives the opposition more chances to prepare for what you do well and where they think they see a dent. If you are constantly improving and changing things up, what they see on film is always changing and they can’t put together as much material on you.
by TheEvilProfessor on Nov 4, 2009 2:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, yes, if “peaking early” means by definition that you are not playing as well at the end as you had been earlier, and peaking late means you a playoff team (who has presumably had to win a lot of games to even get there) is playing even better than what got them into playoffs, then yeah a team “peaking late” is by definition gonna do better in playoffs than one who “peaked early” is playing worse in playoffs than they had been. This is a syllogism, and doesn’t’ really actually tell you much.
I guessI’m saying I don’t get this implied fear of "peaking early: in the sense that you can play TOO good at first, somehow that playing really well early makes it MORE likely that you will play less well later. I think this is a false worry; I would even say it is actually a compeltely contradictory thought (by and large the teams that play well in playoffs are teams that played really well to start with, not the teams that weren’t playing well)
by puddnhead on Nov 4, 2009 3:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
no that was just Ted Thompson crapping his pants on Aug 18th
Vikings 4 the superbowl
by RaysOfHope on Nov 4, 2009 1:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I would have loved to have been a fly on his office wall that day when he got the word
I imagine he may have just buried his head in his hands for a long moment. Thinking about it, I almost feel sorry for the guy.
Until I remember that he brought it on himself, and could have easily done just a couple things differently in how he moved Favre that would have protected himself later. Hard to feel sorry for it then, when you consider that he basically asked to have this done to him.
by puddnhead on Nov 4, 2009 3:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Peaked Not hardly
Have the Saints peaked? I hope so. Keep getting better thats the key. Stay healthy thats the other big key. Lets get Tjack involved in a few plays in the wildcat. Let BF have a few plays or maybe even a series off. 1. It makes our offense harder to defend. Let Tjack make that block for Harvin not BF. He’s athletic enough to run if he has to plus he has done a good job of passing on the move. 2. It gives BF a few plays off. Everyone is worried that BF with wear down in a long season. AP always draws a crowd, lets run a reverse or 2 a game with him & Harvin. Lets get these guys in space. How about a quick pitch to PF with AP leading the way. AP loves to run over people anyway he doesn’t need the ball to do that.
by iowaron on Nov 4, 2009 11:03 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Peaking
Peaking happens when the team gets complacent with its playing style. This usually happens when they start winning a lot and the coaches/players fail to keep up the intensity needed.
I don’t think we’ve peaked by any stretch as a team. However, I do think we peaked as for our schedule. After this last Green Bay game really until we get to the post season I’m going to be a little meh (although I hope we crush the Giants.)
It’’s more of a win because we need home field and a bye not a boy I hope we kill these guys!
by Grime on Nov 4, 2009 11:20 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
If any Vikings player thinks we've "peaked' by that definition
then they’re idiots. Has there been any game other than the rams that we haven’t had a moment of panic or unease well into the game (the second half)?
There haven’t been any other opportunities to be “complancent.” Which is a shame, because it would really be nice to rest Adrian and of course Brett.
by puddnhead on Nov 4, 2009 3:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
All I know is
my blood pressure sure has “peaked” in every game this year.
"Skol pa fiskande"
by NobleSavage on Nov 4, 2009 3:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
I can relate to that…in my case is not just the game/play, it is the connection (internet) to be able to find out what the hell is/was going on during “the game(s)/play(s)” …
Super fun year…..understatement!
I would rather be IN the Arena than watching from the stands...That is my life!
* Read Teddy Roosevelt's "Man in the Arena" if you need further explanation...
by vikingfanfrom afar on Nov 4, 2009 5:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So - did the
Patriots peak too early, thus the SB loss? They were consistent all year. I think this is good consistency showing, and at worst, being more than good enough to win when domination falls short, or play under ability. I think they are all so hungry – they are all working hard to be better every week.
by jshep on Nov 4, 2009 12:29 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
No
The Patriots actually played the Giants better than the Ravens that year, IMO. It was just the breaks that the Ravens lost, and the Giants won. Each game could have gone the other way. Come on, Tyree’s catch, jut for one example, was a fluke that is just this side of intervention. While meanwhile the Ravens actually DID beat the patriots … would have, if they’re coach hadn’t called for a time out a split second before the Patriots went for it in the closign seconds at fourth down (a timeout which none of hte players on the field realized happened until the “nonplay” had finsihed).
by puddnhead on Nov 4, 2009 3:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It's not really about peaking
A peek at the Vikings schedule reveals that the 2nd half will be much tougher.
There is only 1 real cupcake game left: DET
The Vikes could split with CHI, and these could go either way:
ARI
SEA
CAR
NYG (could be backups vs. backups)
PHI will probably shred the Vikes.
The passing D will be tested more severely than ever in 2009 in these 8 games.
So I think that leaves the Vikes with about 11-5 or 10-6.
by KC Viking on Nov 4, 2009 12:48 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
"PHI will probably shred the Vikes."
mmm, I think I can almost guarantee that won’t happen. At least not in the regular season.
by Migrant lurker on Nov 4, 2009 1:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No?
I’d love to be wrong, but I think the Eagles would still have an advantage in a close game.
by KC Viking on Nov 4, 2009 3:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I don't necessarily agree with that, but...
more to the point – they’re not on our schedule.
by Migrant lurker on Nov 4, 2009 3:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
GOOD POINT!
HA! I’m not sure how I missed that one.
I do think CIN is dangerous, though.
by KC Viking on Nov 4, 2009 3:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The Eagles aren't on our schedule, but we could see them in the playoffs again
The Vikings are 0-5 against Mcnabb in the reg-season, and 0-2 against Mcnabb in the playoffs. It’s safe to say the Eagles would have the edge in that match-up. (until we bring Favre on the field)…lol
by chaosg on Nov 4, 2009 5:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I actually think
that the Eagles are the 3rd best team in the NFC. And pretty dangerous. Which is why I hope we end up with the top seed – let NO deal with them in round 2.
by Migrant lurker on Nov 4, 2009 6:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If the Seattle game goes "the other way"
Color me extremely let down. Sorry, have to disagree with you on that one being tough. Unless something there changes quickly, the wheels will be completely off by the time we face them. Did you see how Houshmanz…whatever lost it last weekend?
Carolina is another one I have a tough time saying could go either way, unless we turn out to be frauds. If we are as good as it looks like we are, and play how we should be able to play, I can’t imagine the Panthers beating us.
by puddnhead on Nov 4, 2009 3:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
SEA
I didn’t see last week’s Seahawks highlights/lowlights.
That team has way too much talent to be 2-5 or whatever they’re at. The Vikings are the toughest game on their schedule, but if Hasselbeck and Housh have begun to gel by then, the Vikings’ secondary could be absolutely shredded in that game. I have no faith in 3/4 of the Vikings’ secondary.
The Panthers have Delhomme to some guy named Steve Smith. That is always a dangerous combination.
by KC Viking on Nov 4, 2009 3:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Delhome is only dangerous to the Panthers
Trust me I live in NC and people are actually contemplating burning an efigy of him at games. They have web sites up begging to fire Fox and Delhome. Hell even Smitty in the first game turned his back on Delhome and told the coach to play the second string QB or he was going home.
No Carolina is in dire straights unless we turn over the ball four times or all of our defensive line gets the swine flu that day we’re going to literally crush them.
I think Brett will be sipping a cool drink and eating a hot dog by the 4th quarter. Hell I hope he is since I’ll be in the stands that day..
by Grime on Nov 4, 2009 4:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Delhomme
A year ago, Jake Delhomme led the Panthers to the playoffs after winning as many regular season games as the Steelers. He has been a part of a consistently competitive team which has won 11 or more games 3x (half the time) since 2003 (including a Super Bowl loss) and fared better than 6-10 until perhaps this year. A lot can change in a year, but he probably hasn’t gone from being that competent to awful.
Only Marc Sanchez is allowed to eat hot dogs on the sidelines. It’s a rule.
by KC Viking on Nov 4, 2009 7:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
At teh start of this season
… every week in Carolina was Delhomme deathwatch. He was so bad, consistently week in and week out, that many were assuming he’d HAVE to be benched. He’s gotten better since around week 4 (?), but really the only place to go from the bottom is up.
by puddnhead on Nov 5, 2009 12:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Peaking to early? No
The whole theory on peaking to early is that at some point a team will play its best game and never be able to duplicate it. This team has yet to play a game where the run blocking was opening up big lanes for AP and the slant quick hitter pass was killing them when they put 8 in the box. At the same time the defense plays solid for 4 quarters. Plus the punter doesn’t shank a couple and evryone tackles the man with the ball.
We are a long way from peaking. But if they do I can see why the team would feel invincible and then quit playing hard. Seems to me that our QB and Pat Williams and Winfield have been through this before and will not let this team get a big head.
Plus the media coverage of all the other great players in the league should keep reminding AP, Allen, and Farve that they aren’t the best at all. At least I hope they keep talking trash about the Vikes not being good enough to beat the Saints or NE or Pittsburg.
by lifelongvike on Nov 4, 2009 4:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Peaking?
I feel at this point in the season we still haven’t played a complete game
by MNVIKES90 on Nov 4, 2009 5:11 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Agree
There have been points in each game that I felt the same…
Having stated that, we have done quite well in regards to the W column, where it matters most…
Once we do put it all together, lookout….I saw the NO game against Atlanta and I have to say this is the team I predict we will meet ion the NFC Championship game….
Guess what? They appear beatable to me…They are good but also vulnerable in some areas….wait until our D gets ahold of Brees…
Summing up: No peak yet, but will about SB start time….THAT will be the peak….This time we must not let it get away….I think this team is aware of this and is focused to get there….
Time will tell….In the meantime, we can all enjoy some SUPER football!
SKOL!
I would rather be IN the Arena than watching from the stands...That is my life!
* Read Teddy Roosevelt's "Man in the Arena" if you need further explanation...
by vikingfanfrom afar on Nov 4, 2009 5:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
N.O.
Does anyone see a similarity to the Saints and the 1998 Vikes?
it is better to be thought of as dumb then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Ben Franklin
by montana vikes fan on Nov 4, 2009 7:39 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
They have a much better Defense
And don’t have Moss, which means they don’t have consistant pass interferance calls going against them.
by Grime on Nov 5, 2009 8:01 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I agree with most everything said or written as the case may be. I think Farver will keep us on an even keel. Saints have a much easier schedule. The toughest test they seem to have is Atlanta again, we will just have to hope for any given Sunday to happen to them.
it is better to be thought of as dumb then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Ben Franklin
by montana vikes fan on Nov 4, 2009 7:47 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I'm not so worried about the Saints
As you say, they have an easy schedule, and seem like a lock at this point to get a top 2 NFC seed and a first week bye.
Since I mostly care about the difference between seed 2 & 3 (extra game to play, not rest at end of season — important for a veteran team like this), and not seeds 1 & 2 (only relevant if both seeds make ti to NFC championship, and even then, we play in a dome if its the Saints), I really don’t care too much if we can catch the Saints in the regular season. But I do care very much if someone else catches up with us and makes us the #3 or #4 seed.
by puddnhead on Nov 5, 2009 12:07 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Saints
Personally I think the Saints D is very over rated. They have had alot of big plays so far, but you cant really count on that. In YPG and PPG their D ranks 15th and 20th respectively.
On the other hand their offense is just amazing. They have so many play makers and in my eyes colston is one of the best wrs in the game
by MNVIKES90 on Nov 5, 2009 10:14 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
