The Holy Trinity Tuesday Roundup With A Corporate Overlord Bonus
The Vikes have one game in the books, and for most of us in Vikings Nation, we see dark clouds on the horizon, and that's reflected in what the Holy Trinity is talking about.
As fans, we tend to overreact too much in either direction with each win or loss--I know I tend to do that. I've tried to look at the positives of the game--Adrian Peterson, special teams, the defense for most of the game--but there were a lot of problem areas that have us worried.
39 yards passing being at the top of most people's list. Two days later, and it's still terrible.
So what is the Trinity talking about on The Day After The Day After?
We'll start with Mark Craig of the Star Tribune, after the jump.
Craig gives us a list of what are his the top three concerns, and I only have a minor disagreement with him. He lists the offensive line, covering backs coming out of the backfield, and halftime adjustments.
I mentioned in the SMR I thought the o-line was decent to good in the first half, but yeah, that second half was something else. Which line is the one we're going to see against Tampa Bay? I don't know, but I do know that if the second half offensive line is closer to the truth than the first half, Minnesota will be lucky to win five games.
I didn't like the underneath stuff the Vikes were giving up to the Charger running backs, particularly late in the second half, but I think they were more concerned about getting beat deep, consequently giving up some of the underneath stuff. Had the Vikings been able to tackle as well as they usually do, I think the damage wouldn't have been nearly so bad in that regard. I thought the Vikes scheme overall was pretty good, but their execution in tackling was poor. And I'm not one to make excuses for the defense, but by the end of the game you could tell they were gassed, so I understand it, at least to some degree. I even saw Antoine Winfield try an arm tackle that turned into a 20+ yard gain on a RB swing pass, which is very unusual. I won't give them a pass on this, but I will give them a week 1 benefit of the doubt. With guys like Fed Pagac and Mike Singletary on the defensive staff, tackling will be a very correctable problem.
Finally, halftime adjustments. Complete agreement here. Football is a funny game, and it was odd to see a team that was doing pretty good in moving the ball do so poorly in the second half. I still don't understand what Bill Musgrave was thinking using the Webbcat when he did; it just seemed to kill any momentum the Vikings had on offense.
Next up, Jeremy Fowler over at the Pioneer Press spreads the blame around, and doesn't pin it all on McNabb's horrid performance. Kind of a telling quote from the story here:
After watching the video, coach Leslie Frazier noticed a few adjustments that could have helped the Vikings - receivers coming back to the football another yard, offensive linemen holding blocks longer, the quarterback getting the ball off sooner.
There's two points of view here. The optimist could look at that quote and think that a couple minor adjustments from some key players, and this offense will be okay. And there's some truth to that. Troy Williamson Bernard Berrian dropped a potentially HUGE pass in the second half, and McNabb over threw Percy Harvin on what looked like a well developed screen in the third quarter. Both could have been momentum changing plays, if not touchdowns. Berrian's ball was underthrown but still catchable. Had McNabb not been hurried and been able to lead BB on that play, it would've been a score, as Berrian had beat the defender by five yards. The pesimist could say that this is a veteran-laden offense, they've been in this system for over a month, and they still can't get on the same page. It doesn't matter what Charlie Johnson does to adjust; he's just not going to be able to get it done, ditto McNabb and Berrian. I'm taking a cautiously optimistic approcah. I thought the Vikings were doing well, for the most part, in the first half, and just executed poorly in the second half, at least on offense. But we shall see.
Finally, Tom Pelissero at ESPN 1500 grades out each position on a 0-5 scale, and it's not pretty. He gives McNabb 1/2 a point, while the special teams grades out at 4 1/2. I thought he downgraded the defensive backs unnecessarily (2 out of 5), but it's tough to lobby for a higher grade when you see that Philip Rivers had over 300 yards passing. But overall, I was pleased with Cedric Griffin, Antoine Winfield, (who Pelissero says had three missed tackles on Sunday while having only five missed tackles all of last year) and Chris Cook.
Corporate Overlord Bonus: Kevin Seifert over at ESPN's NFC North blog reports that the Vikings ran 15 of 19 times on first down, and I'm surprised that it wasn't more. He also relays this quote from Frazier about that skewed statistic:
That is something you have to guard against. They were stacking the line of scrimmage, and when that happens, you have to take advantage of that down the field. That is something that we are going to a look at. Adrian is such a threat, and such a focal part of our offense, we have to be aware of how people are going to try to defend us. This game will hopefully be one of those games that we look back on and will have helped us.
Well, let's hope that the Vikings can look at the tape and fix it. One thing that impressed me in the pre-season was at how varied the play calling was, and that Bill Musgrave seemed to know what play to call whatever situation the Vikes were in. On Sunday, however, Minnesota was consistently faced with third and 5 or more yards against the Chargers, and this offense seems like it best operates best with manageable down and distance situations. This isn't a deep strike team, and third and longs are something that they can't consistently find success in.
And with this, I close the book on the San Diego game and move forward towards Tampa Bay. The Bucs are a good team, with a good young quarterback, and Tiki Barber's twin brother. With the NFC North looking like the toughest division in football, the Vikings can ill afford to go 0-2 out of the gate.
18 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
We could have won that game...
Where to start….
39 yards. That seems like the sorest thumb. IMO, for a 12 year veteran QB, a man who should be extremely capable of reading defenses and picking them apart, I expect better.
With P. Manning down, the Colts went out to the graveyard and dug up Kerry Collins for One-More-Season. If you go to NFL.com’s highlights from the game, in the beginning you’ll see a picture of Collins on the sideline. He’s got a white beard. A FREAKING WHITE BEARD. Yet, the Old Man managed to put up 197 yards passing. Not bad for a graveyard find.
Which brings me back around to…. 39 yards. Now, I was one of the guys who was very optimistic about McNabb. I thought he had the look of a man who was ready to show the world that he can still get it up get up and go when time comes to step out on gridiron. I thought that last year was an aberration. Well, Mr. Donovan McNabb… you really do have a lot to prove now. And if you can’t prove it, this year, then I suspect teams will go back to the graveyard to dig up old bones like Collins and Favre and JEFF GEORGE, before they let you wear their colors.
I know it sounds good to say the defense was ‘gassed’ so they couldn’t hold SD back in the second half. Because, you know, they were just on the field too dang long since the Vikings offense didn’t do their job. There could be some truth to that. But it makes me wonder how it is that the SD offense was able to keep going, for just as many minutes as our defense, without getting… what was the word? Oh, yes. “Gassed”. Maybe SD’s O-line and receivers are just in better physical condition than the Viking’s D-line and secondary? Certainly, they didn’t seem to be “gassed”. I wonder how they manage to do it…. Maybe it’s all that sunshine they got out there, lots of Vitamin D…. Or maybe the Viking’s D is just out of shape. Did McKinnie just happen to accidently swallow an orca when he was at SeaWorld, or is there an entire culture of being out of shape, in the Viking’s locker room? Makes me wonder…
On the bright side, if the Vikings DO go 2-14, they could get very LUCKy next year :)
And that wouldn’t break my heart either. With every single division rival now boasting a franchise quality QB, the NFC North is going to be a killer division for at least the next 10-12 years. A mediocre defense isn’t going to stop that powerhouse, and the offense MUST have a franchise-quality QB to lead it, or the Vikings will be in the doghouse for a very, very, very long time….
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!
We could have won that game..
and that is why it was so disappointing. Having watched the game again I am less disappointed than I was. The Vikes did hold what might be the most productive offense in the NFL this year to 24 points, despite being on the field for a disproportionate amount of time. The penalties at the end were disappointing but repairable. The offense was disappointing but that is probably because I had unreasonable expectations. Johnson was not as bad as some want to say and the pass protection in the second half was not all that bad either. The Oline was unable to clear any room for AP but that is probably due to the total lack of a passing offense.
So why was there a total lack of passing offense? Unfortunately I think McNabb continued right where he left off against Dallas. Passes were late, low and behind the receivers. The receivers themselves could have done better. Catchable balls were dropped. Put those together and you kill all the possible drives, leave their defense concentrating against the run and our defense getting no break at all.
Personally, I think we have a probable solution for the QB problem in Joe Webb. It might cost us a few turnovers to get him up to speed but I prefer that to no life. The play calling seemed to be lacking but I think it would not have looked so bad if we had a little execution. What to do about dropped balls and lack of open receivers? It will take someone better than me to find a solution for that. Maybe the coaches can help that and improve the play calling.
by berserkerND on Sep 13, 2011 11:02 AM CDT up reply actions
Why
would McNaab’s accuracy and ability to read the defense decline with age (he is not THAT old)? I can see the legs giving out, but he showed he could still run. In years past he has put up huge numbers. I don’t see the basis for thinking that somehow he just lost his accuracy because he got too old. Never seen that before in other QB’s. Their mobility goes, their resiliency goes. Not their accuracy, unless it is related to arm strength (eg, Brad Johnson). Does not appear like McNaab has lost his arm strength.
Given the available hypotheses to explain the dropoff in his performance from prior years last year and the first game this year, I tend to think the most plausible explanation is system/scheme. I am hoping that the reason for the poor stats in game 1 is unfamiliraity with the scheme and players, and also because he did not have the time that the OL gave him in the preseason. It might also be because the WRs did not et open, and SD playe great pass defense, and because the Vikes D could not get off the field at all in the 2d half. They were NOT gassed at the start of the 3rd QTR but could not get off the field.
We shall see.
TiggerSr
The o-line gave no time and
Lets face it, other than Harvin the Viking WRs are bad. Great return, but not being able to get Percy any more than 2 catches for 7 yards…………………..!
I'll have your mother call you shortly.
The caption under the picture should read...
“Hey, little man. I’ve been with the Vikings one damn game, and I just got myself a touchdown. You’ve probably forgotten how that feels, because we both know pre-season doesn’t count. Look here. I’m not even gonna let you touch this ball. This is a touchdown ball. You’ve got to go out and get those yourself. You’ve got to earn it. Honestly man, it’s not just about “earning it” you’ve also got to CATCH it! Now let’s head on over to the sidelines and make the cheerleaders jealous. I hear those girls envy your skinny little legs!"
The linebackers nedded to do a better job
of picking up the backs and receivers in the flat. I know we didn’t want to get burned deep, but letting San Diego dip and dunk for first down after first down was ridonkulous. Why couldn’t we… of the 39 yds passing… do the same thing? Oh yeah we don’t have a deep threat to keep the backers and safeties off our TE, Slot and RBs. I hope we game plan better this week.
Tampa-2
The Viking’s defense is designed to bend but not break. Keep the deep ball from happening, contain receptions inside of the 10-20 yard zone. It allows a halfway decent QB to march down field but should pull up very stout inside the 20. Mostly that’s worked over the past few years, and remember that Frazier was D coordinator. Personally, I’ve never liked it, and I think it’s allowed the Vikings to field some pretty mediocre secondaries in the past 6 or 7 years.
I think you’re right about the game planning, though. The coaches should be working up 2 game plans every week, and adjusting the second one during the first half where they can watch the opponent and figure out where the weak spots are. Coming out with the same game plan in the 2nd half is just butt-stupid, you have to know the other side is going to adjust for whatever you had that worked in the first half.
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!
Frazier
appeared to put the blame on poor tackling, not the cover-2-don’t-get-beat-deep scheme they have employed for awhile now.
My take: the scheme worked GREAT in the first half but terribly in the 2d. Why??? The biggest difference I saw was that in the first half, the Vikes were able to force Rivers to throw early by an agressive rush and LB blitzes that got the QB. In the 2d half, every time Henerson or Greenway blitzed, the SD OL picked it up and Rivers had all sorts of time to throw. Result? ERxtra time in the pocket caused the DBs and LBs in coverage to retreat further back into the zones in the secondary, widening the distance between them and the RB in the flat. So when the RB caught the ball in the flat in the 2d half, he had lots of daylight before the LBs and Dbs could get to him. THAT’s why SD could do it so effectively in 2d half (but not the first) and THAT is also why the Vikes could not do the same thing effectively on offense, because the OL could not give McNabb that kind of time to let the flat open up.
Just my take.
TiggerSr
I agree
Our tackling was really bad, Winfield even said it in an interview today. In the 2nd half Rivers stopped throwing it deep and started hitting the flats more. He realized the Vikings were protecting their safeties and weren’t going to give up the big play so he took what we were giving him. That being said I am encouraged by the pass rush of Allen and Robison, it seems like they have the potential to create a lot of pressure and when KWills comes back our line should be good.
by Simply_Greatness on Sep 13, 2011 8:34 PM CDT up reply actions
I've been
trying not to comment this week in an effort to calm down. With as crappy as we performed, to have actually had a shot at winning is beyond me. It kind of makes me optimistic about the rest of the year though. If we can almost win against a very good team when we played poorly, there really is hope that we can do pretty well. I wont be holding my breath, but I will enjoy the season. Also, just for the hell of it, BUILD THE DAMN STADIUM!!!
by A shot at greatness, probable failure on Sep 13, 2011 1:12 PM CDT reply actions
agreed, there is no way "we almost won that game".
we rolled over when we gave up a td and still had a 17-14 lead. it seemed like they just quit and figured that we were going to get rolled anyway. it was so uninspired. i want winners. who did you see on the vikings get dog mad mean when we let the lead slip away? nobody. that concerns me. who is going to put some fire into the team and get people jacked up enough to compete? that appears to be a missing ingredient. imho, of course. btw, i saw ben roethlisberger marching his team downfield in the final 2 minutes of the game with a sense of urgency, even after 7 turnovers and when they were down 35-7. that’s inspired play, imo.
warcraft, you are my guitar hero !!!
Rivers is awesome
He made adjustments after the 1st have and took what was there. The dink and dunk for good chunks most times.
I'll have your mother call you shortly.
They took what we were giving them
And we couldn’t tackle at all
by Simply_Greatness on Sep 13, 2011 8:35 PM CDT up reply actions
That is the bitch of the cover 2
If your athletes arent good enough you get beat over the middle, DBs included! As per the 2nd half…
I'll have your mother call you shortly.
Two things + warning
1) Cut BBerrian
2) Singletary start teaching your players to stand people up and go for the ball.
WARNING: Hey McNabb 0-4 or 2-6 begins the Ponder era in MInnesota. Start playing like it matters.
haha yes the Vikings "could" have won this game
It’s more accurate to say they could have lost by a lot more. Let’s see, 7 points came off a kick return, and San Diego turned it over twice in scoring territory. Oh, and who could forget Norv going for it on 4th and 20 in field goal range. Scifres proved later he could kick field goals, so that decision was, umm, questionable. In other words, San Diego left a lot of points on the field, and Minnesota was lucky to get 17. This game was a lot more lopsided than you think. After the midpoint of the 2nd quarter, San Diego dominated. The only thing that stopped them on offense was themselves, whereas Minnesota didn’t do a THING on offense after that.
I like this: “After watching the video, coach Leslie Frazier noticed a few adjustments that could have helped the Vikings – receivers coming back to the football another yard, offensive linemen holding blocks longer, the quarterback getting the ball off sooner.” Leslie, those aren’t adjustments as much as they are, having better players. Especially the bit about the offensive line; as if Jeff Davidson can just go up to Charlie Johnson, tell him to hold his block a little longer, and it’ll all be fixed.
This team is the worst kind of bad; it’s bad and old. If I’m Frazier, I’m giving it one more half to turn around. There is no sense in wasting this season on guys like McNabb, Shiancoe, Hutchinson, E.J. Henderson, Berrian, guys who have no future with this team. Start rolling in the younger players and let’s find out who can play in 2012, ’13 and beyond.
Let me get this straight
You are saying that, because of the way the Vikes lost by seven points at SD in the first game of the season, the Vikes should give up on this season UNLESS the team “turns it around” in the first half of the second game of the season? That’s what you think?
TiggerSr

by 






















