Something to think about: The Special Teams
by vikingfuture8816 on Jun 11, 2009 12:10 AM CDT
16 comments
Last year's special teams was quite a mess. The Vikings allowed 7 touchdowns on special teams. Twice, they gave up two touchdowns in a game on special teams. Two at New Orleans and two at Chicago. I remember hearing that allowing 7 touchdowns on special teams was a record of some kind, but I can't find if it is a team record or an NFL record. Its also possible I heard wrong, but would you be that surprised if it was? For a comparison, the Lions were the only other team in the NFC North to allow a touchdown on special teams, a punt return by Santana Moss. If Detroit, having one of the worst seasons for a franchise ever, only allows one special teams TD to the Viking's 7 and the rest of the North allow none, that its an area that need big improvement.
Luckily, there were only two games that were decided by those special teams touchdowns. Eliminate the punt return at Green Bay and the special teams miscues that occurred at Chicago and the Vikings finish 12-4 instead of 10-6. That would have been the difference in getting a bye week in the playoffs since the Vikings would have had the tie breaker over Carolina having beat them earlier. Of course, this is dealing in hypotheticals, but its easy to see how they impacted the season. It could have been worse, too. I am sure everyone remembers how close Reggie Bush came to winning for the Saints on his punt returns. Green Bay went up in their game at the HHH when they returned a punt and Adrian had to create some magic to pull that win out.
The point I am going for here: The Vikings gave up way too many special teams touchdowns and it affected their overall record. In the past 3 years the Vikings have scored 4 special teams TDs and allowed 12. That is a ratio that needs to change. Hopefully, they do a better job in coverage this year and possibly Harvin can make a difference in returns.
So I am putting the over/under on special teams touchdowns allowed by the Vikings at 3. Think the Vikings can lock it down on special teams with a new coach and new rules (no more 3 man wedges) and stop allowing TDs or will they have the same problems?
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 |
16 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Something I'd rather not think about...
Although, I think the unit will be quite a bit better this year. Can’t get any worse, right? Wait… I totally just jinxed us. Darnit.
I say push.
In AP I trust
Just say no to Favre.
by FarvaForTheVikings on Jun 11, 2009 1:09 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I do believe the Vikings only tied the record in a season for ST TD’s allowed, and all in the first 9 games of the season. Don’t think we had any after the NO game where we tied it.
by BacksThePack on Jun 11, 2009 1:42 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
thanks
I am just getting over nightmares of special teams from last year.September would have been soon enough to be reminded.i just hope ZIGI or CHILDRESS read your comments.
by runtellthat on Jun 11, 2009 5:16 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think there will be some improvements.
The Vikes have brought in alot of help on special teams and we are going to have our top ST player back. Hopefully the new coach will make an impact as well. It is painful to think that with even mediocre ST play we would have won a game or two more and would’ve had some more clear cut wins during the season.
Hopefully, we will be the Dolphins(big turn-around) of special teams next year.
http://vikingsmashfootball.wordpress.com/
by BeardedAxe on Jun 11, 2009 6:46 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Special teams is more than TDs, too
I found this link to Stampede Blue (Colts SBN blog), when I was comparing the STs and field position of the Bears and Broncos. I’d no idea where the Vikings graded out, but according to this they’re #30 in average starting field position over the last five years. This does take into account field position after a turnover, as well, not just KRs and PRs.
Here’s a link to the five years’ worth of data aggregated:
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/112875/AvgStartPos_5year.html
Here’s the original post and discussion:
http://www.stampedeblue.com/2009/5/9/870456/finding-the-winning-factors
OT: The ‘aha’ moment for me was seeing the Bears starting at the 33.5 yard-line, and the Broncos at the 28.5. Jay Cutler’s field just got five yards shorter, and Kyle Orton’s field just got five yards longer.
by BullsFanInSeattle on Jun 11, 2009 7:05 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m seeing an under. I’m thinking the season before last in terms of ST TDs allowed. That being 1. To Hester. With Farwell and Boulware, ST coverage should be a LOT better. We won’t have to worry about giving up a cheap TD half the games we play.
by Frost on Jun 11, 2009 9:56 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Paymah should help too
He is a speedy, hard hitter. He was always good on special teams. if he could put those skills to use as a corner he would command some big $. Some guys are just destined to be great special teams players who are good reserves. Guys like Heath build their confidence on ST and get fired up when they get a chance to spell a guy. Boulware, Paymah, Farwell and Sapp (if he can get his tantrums under control) can be very valuable.
I thinks we’ll be much better on ST. The asst. (memory???) who is taking over hopefully will have his own ideas. I’m not going to blame him for the sorry ass coverage we had last year.
by CitrusFLViking on Jun 11, 2009 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
thinks
my meds at work again :-)
by CitrusFLViking on Jun 11, 2009 4:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
this is our #1 area of concern
forget the qb situation, forget the williams wall, forget winfield
fix the special teams!
had our special teams been simply average last year, how much better would our qb’s have looked? how many more games would we have won?
by iseepurplepeople on Jun 11, 2009 2:39 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Well it certainly wouldn’t have helped the QBs look better. They weren’t on the field, after all. Unless they would look better by NOT being on the field, since the other team would have to actually go down the field instead of getting the cheap TD.
But it would definitely help out in that W/L column. How many games did we lose because of an easy ST TD?
by Frost on Jun 11, 2009 9:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it would have helped the qbs in third ways.
first field position. having a solid return guy(s) makes a big difference. winning the field position battle favors the offense.
second tds. if you have to come back from being down because of special teams, you’re going to have to throw more and take more risks. both bad for qbs.
third momentum. big special teams plays pump up the whole team. meanwhile, the opposing team becomes demoralized. ‘we just took the lead on a long drive and in 30 seconds we’re losing again.’
by iseepurplepeople on Jun 12, 2009 1:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We would have won a couple more games last year if the ST was up to NFL par. If they had been outstanding, maybe 3.
Was a time when the Vikes were known for ball-hawking and kick/punt blocking, it’d be nice to see that return as well.
by DCPurple on Jun 13, 2009 6:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't forget the D!!
This fact/stat about the special teams TD’s allowed… How much better does that make our defense look last year? Overall points allowed… etc. Imagine what the overall team Defense rating would have been with only say 3 TD’s allowed instead.
If we shore up special teams this year, our D could put up some special numbers of their own.
by BleedingPurple on Jun 11, 2009 6:08 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
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.
