11-3 and at a...Crossroads?
When the Minnesota Vikings entered the month of December, they were starting to be touted as the best team in football. Now, with two embarrassing losses in three games and a potential budding feud between the head coach and the starting quarterback, those same folks are discounting the Vikings as a post season threat.
Really?
This issue is all revolving around a combination of selective Childress idiocy, an over-active, modern day press rushing to report anything, whether it's true or not, and poor offensive line play in those losses. With the exception of Sully, it's the same line as last year. I consider Loadholt an upgrade, so Cook isn't part of the equation here, IMHO. In the 11 wins, they've played, for the most part, pretty well. In the three losses, they've had their collective asses handed to them.
I say selective Childress idiocy in that he thought about benching Favre--with a lead, mind you--while the Vikings still had reasonable expectations to win home field advantage throughout the playoffs. Seriously?! And he thought Favre would be okay with that? Really?
ESPN loves to make stories these days instead of report them. Let's look further at when Childress wanted to bench Favre, according to Kevin Seifert, about the only level-headed guy who's reported on this story so far (and although he's at ESPN now, he's a GREAT guy. When I got press credentials to training Camp in 2006, he was the beat writer for the Star Tribune and he really helped me out on writing and reporting. Great dude):
1. At Green Bay. He wanted to pull Favre, not for performance, but at the end of the game. During the Ted Thompson eff you game. In Green Bay. Where he played for 16 years and was loved, but was booed mercilessly. Once again I ask...seriously?! During THAT game you expected Favre to come out? See my 'Selective Childress Idiocy' theory one more time.
2. Nov 15, at home against Detroit. That would be the game where Adrian Peterson rushed for 133 yards and two touchdowns. And Favre had 344 passing yards. Again...seriously?! You're moving the ball up and down the field, and you're pissed off that Favre audibled? Once again, I refer to 'Selective Childress Idiocy'.
After a loss, people spout off about stuff because they're pissed off. ESPN, being the corporate whore that they are, will milk anything into the ground, especially when it involves Brett Favre. I'm sorry, but I just can't take anything Tim Hasselback or Trent Dilfer say seriously. They're Tim Hasselback and Trent Dilfer, probably the only two quarterbacks worse than Sean Salisbury. And they're commenting on Brett Favre. Really? And ESPN wouldn't want to promote a juicy, controversial story line about the Vikings for their upcoming Monday Night game against the Bears, would they? I mean, since the Bears are having such a great season and all.
Finally, and most importantly...It's the line play. When the offense isn't working, it's because the line play is terrible. In the three losses, opposing defenses were playing on Minnesota's side of the line of scrimmage. Running lanes were never opened because the line got penetration from multiple guys, preventing AP from both hitting the hole or making a cutback. Opponents have been very disciplined and have 'stayed home', which has also prevented AP from getting huge chunks of yardage. Chilly is as stubborn as a mule, and one of our beefs is that he'll run into a brick wall and use guys as a battering ram, to no avail. Now we've got a guy that has the ability to see that the called play will fail before it runs, checks into a play that has a better chance of success...and we're pissed off about this?
I'll be the first to admit nothing was working Sunday night, and there had to be a significant level of frustration, and when you're frustrated you say things in the heat of the moment. Chilly didn't want to pull Favre because of performance, it's because he was getting pummeled, and although ESPN loves this latest Favre controversy, how would they report this story if Favre got hurt Sunday and missed the playoffs? Chilly would get crushed for NOT pulling him, so he's in kind of a No Man's Land there.
This is 'Schism Gate II'. Schism Gate I ended with Favre being elected team captain, so I'm not too worried about that, to be honest.
I am VERY worried about the o-line play. That will be the exploding fireball that ruins this season, not Favre or Chilly, because if your o-line can't run block or pass protect, it doesn't matter what you call.
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 |
31 comments
|
Comments
Need to run the ball
It’s not the yardage as much as the number of attempts that matter in rushing. We need to get our number of attempts much higher.
We didn’t run the ball at key times in the game against Carolina. That was a big problem.
Exactly what I've been Preaching!
Why Do People Question The Vikings' Status?
by UnBannedVikingholic on Dec 22, 2009 10:37 AM CST up reply actions
But when the D is throwing 8 or 9 in the box like Carolina, shouldn’t we force them to play honest? AP was going no where every time.
I think we must force defenses to play honest. Force them to change their game plan. Not let them change ours. Once we do that they won’t know how to stop us.
What is killing us is Chilly’s conservative play calling. Then the O-line is a close 2nd.
It's our sucky formations that we've been running since Peterson's been here!
Maybe we should change them up a bit!
Why Do People Question The Vikings' Status?
by UnBannedVikingholic on Dec 22, 2009 11:10 AM CST up reply actions
8 or 9 in the box last year
and AD was still producing.
Exactly
Peterson’s attempts has fallen…We rarely threw 40 times a game last year, and now that we are, we’re lessing Peterson’s attempts to bust a long one!
Why Do People Question The Vikings' Status?
by UnBannedVikingholic on Dec 22, 2009 11:15 AM CST up reply actions
Last year we use two tight ends a lot
This year, almost never.
by medicineball on Dec 22, 2009 11:19 AM CST up reply actions
AP was going no where every time...weak excuse
He got 12 total carries the whole game; not nearly enough.
And explain this. This is the sequence of AD’s runs from 8 min in the 2nd quarter on:
(see http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/playbyplay?gameId=291220029&period=2)
- A.Peterson left tackle 7 yards
- A.Peterson left end for 10 yards
- A.Peterson up the middle for 4 yards, TOUCHDOWN (sick run, if you watched the game)
THEN PETERSON DOES NOT GET ANOTHER CARRY UNTIL OUR THIRD OFFENSIVE SERIES OF THE 3RD QUARTER! Why?
They had finally gotten the run game going on their only successful drive, then Favre checks out of runs and AD doesn’t get another carry until 3 possessions later.
This is a huge problem. Why did we only run the ball 14 times total in a game that was a 1-point game until the 4th quarter? How to Peterson get 1760 yards last year with basically the same line (-Birk +Sullivan, -Cook +Loadholt is about the same)?
Because you need to run the ball consistently to have success. You need to wear down the D. Remember the first game of the season? AD’s massive awesome run came on his last carry. Now he’s not even getting that chance.
Once. ONCE!!
for the love of Odin…
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Dec 22, 2009 11:47 PM CST up reply actions
I mostly agree
Except for one thing. I don’t care how ‘’pissed off’’ you are after a hard loss. In highschool or maybe even college you might expect some frustration to be vented. Not in the pros. You HAVE to realize that the media absolutely thrashes players and/or coaches words that get blurted out.
“They are who we thought they were”
“PLAYOFFS?!?!”
Just a few examples of supposed ’’professional’’ coaches venting their frustrations. Now those two are tag lines for every joke approaching the same catagory. Bottom line- you simply cannot afford to ‘’vent frustrations’’ publicly at the pro level. It is unacceptable.
by Jepp The Viking on Dec 22, 2009 10:34 AM CST reply actions
Good point
And I agree. But what’s done is done, and they need to get on the same page and do a big Kumbayah.
"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
Brett Favre is the one who provided
the fuel for the media driven Schism Gate II fire. He should’ve kept it in the family. I think Brett did as well as can be expected with the protection he was given, but think TJ might have had some success on some scrambles. I think what Chill was mad about was Brett was audibling out of some run plays and wasn’t having success because of the lack of pass protection. Maybe he should’ve stuck with the play called?
nothing was working...
Not the runs, not the pass, not the protection.
We got beat in the trenches.
Professionally.. .maybe they shouldn’t have shared their frustrations (creating more Coors Lite commercial fodder), but I appreciate seeing the ‘passion’ in the loss. They got ‘smash-mouthed’.
Now… let’s see how they respond to the Bears – on grass, in the cold…
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Dec 22, 2009 10:53 AM CST up reply actions
I thought Brett brought it up at the post game presser?
Not sure if this was before or after McKinnies tweet, whoever it was probably should have kept it to themselves knowing the media would run with it.
how about TJack on wildcat??
i always wondered why, instead of percy or chet…which would pretty much telegraph a run play..use the just as quick TJ for the occassional wildcat.. similar to the eagles w/ the dogkiller.. esp in games where offense just not clicking.. (see sundays game)..
this would give viable run-pass option and if TJ blows out a knee..oh well, rosenfels is solid #3..
"the following statement is true:
the preceding statement was false" - george carlin
Selective Childress idiocy!?!
Dammit MilCardFan, I thought Childress did the right thing all the time? He said so himself on TV, so it must be true. Maybe the NFL network needs to replay that bit to educate us all again.
A good coach makes his team better, he doesn’t wait for a better team to make him look good.
Dwarg, how's it going?
C’mon now, isn’t that a little out of context? I mean, when you look at what I originally said:
http://www.dailynorseman.com/2009/10/28/1105517/chilly-the-kao-and-two-minute
It was that I liked the commercial, and agreed that although he’s done some classless things, he’s getting it right more than he’s getting it wrong this year. Sunday night, he got it wrong.
Selectively, he was an idiot. Taking your starting QB out when you’re leading is a dumb call.
Sorry, I just really liked that commercial, lol.
"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
LOL ;p
I know, I just figure when you’re going to tell the world you do the right thing all the time, even when no one is looking, I want to see you walk on water and turn the gatorade into wine; not throwing hissy fits on the sideline with your starting QB. Then find out you’ve tried to pull him several times before only to have him smack you down in front of the rest of the team.
You’re right the O-Line was the biggest problem in that game, but this has the potential to be a huge problem for the Vikings if it isn’t handled quickly and calmly.
If cooler heads prevail Favre and Chilly will just have a conversation, then a quick team meeting and this whole thing goes away. But if egos get in the way, as they so often do in professional sports, and players start choosing sides, this whole season goes up in smoke real fast. Even in between those options do we want Favre starting to worry about weather or not he should audible on this play because it might make Chilly mad? Do we want Childress calling plays whose sole purpose it so placate Favre’s ego, or on the other hand, show him who the boss really is?
This could be nothing, but it could be a lot of things too. I hope they have it worked out by tomorrow, if it isn’t already.
A good coach makes his team better, he doesn’t wait for a better team to make him look good.
Gotta blame someone
Mildcardfan,
You can keep preaching basic football sense to the fly-by-night fans but they just don’t get it. Football is won and loss in the trenches and since its difficult to blame any one player the coach is always to blame. Personally, I think Ziggy voted with his checkbook and that counts more than any other vote.
We are fortunate to be able to root for an 11-3 team that has true SB aspirations. Would we like to be peaking now? Of course. Can we get back to true form before the playoffs? Yes We Can!!!
Skoal
11-3. Funny how to some thats not a good record and points to a weak team. I was always under the assumption that a team with this record would make the fans happy. 16-0 would be great but cmon this team is good, it just has to come to play.
11-3 aside...
The Vikings have lost bad a couple of times. Let them lose like they lost the Steelers game and no one would say a word. Seeing them completely out played and beat up shouldn’t inspire anything else from the fans. I could deal with a loss, hell a losing season if my team weren’t more talented then others and competed every down.
Yes they did perform poorly in two games...
No doubt on that…Is the season over and should we pack it in now and just give up?
Hell no….Now is when we dig in and look hard at the many things that were wrong and fix them….The posts here are at least offering some constructive criticism for the most part….
Many of the negative posts (I do understand because of the frustration of how we lost the two) from other “fans” on other posts are simply plain negative – offering nothing other than “we suck.”
Yes they can turn this around, and yes I believe they will….If they do not they will be watching the Super Bowl as we will on TV….As stated these guys ARE professionals (even though in two games of 13 they did not act like it), I have confidence they will get their collective crap together….
Let’s see on Monday…..This is not a “gimme” match… Da Bears would love nothing more than to throw another L on us, and demoralize us further…we have the potential to beat them and do it smartly….Just have to execute….again Let’s see…Can’t wait to get this game started….
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 Dec 22, 2009 11:30 PM CST up reply actions
Favre's audbibling to passes not giving AD a chance
AD got 12 total carries the whole game; not nearly enough.
And explain this. This is the sequence of AD’s runs from 8 min in the 2nd quarter on:
(see http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/playbyplay?gameId=291220029&period=2)
- A.Peterson left tackle 7 yards
- A.Peterson left end for 10 yards
- A.Peterson up the middle for 4 yards, TOUCHDOWN (sick run, if you watched the game)
THEN PETERSON DOES NOT GET ANOTHER CARRY UNTIL OUR THIRD OFFENSIVE SERIES OF THE 3RD QUARTER! Why?
They had finally gotten the run game going on their only successful drive, then Favre checks out of runs and AD doesn’t get another carry until 3 possessions later.
This is a huge problem. Why did we only run the ball 14 times total in a game that was a 1-point game until the 4th quarter? How to Peterson get 1760 yards last year with basically the same line (-Birk +Sullivan, -Cook +Loadholt is about the same)?
Because you need to run the ball consistently to have success. You need to wear down the D. Remember the first game of the season? AD’s massive awesome run came on his last carry. Now he’s not even getting that chance.
you sir...
are a spammer and I have flagged every one of your ‘repeat’ entries.
stop.
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Dec 22, 2009 11:50 PM CST up reply actions
sorry, but calm the hell down
Yes I pasted the same thing because it is a good point that no one (including you) has answered and it proves the point that Favre is hurting the identity of the team.
But more generally, why are you so offended that I repeated the same point? I am not “spamming” with irrelevant information and I’ve usually posted in response to someone else’s argument that “well, the other team just took our run game away” which is a weak argument and which misses the point that has been reported on several news sources.
But by all means, continue “policing” these threads if it makes you feel better. I’m sorry if my legitimate posts about the Vikings bother you so much.
I am calm...
I even said please… I’m not offended either… just trying to get you in the game.
see my other response.
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Dec 23, 2009 1:43 AM CST up reply actions
Ace
U want to force the run..WRONG..U take what defense gives U…Problem is,,,we have been TOO conservative, especially on away games…If they stack the box, you throw off play action on 1st and 2nd down to keep defense honest..Force run 1st and 2nd, then pass 3rd and long all time will get Favre killed.. Not adjusting to flow of game, by Chilly, is also killing us…not helping with Peppers disrupted offense all game..Should have been simple adjustment..Chilly is an idiot and we win games in spite of him
Are we?
Is Brett Favre taking what the defense is giving him, or is he audibling out to something he is a whole lot more comfortable with? He likes the spotlight and he even admitted that he didn’t come to Minnesota just to hand the ball off to Adrian Peterson.
It may take a village to raise a child, but it takes a Viking to raze a village.
by Luft Krigare on Dec 23, 2009 4:37 AM CST up reply actions
























