Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Win or Lose, Boston Celtics' New Big 3 Era A Success

Upon further review, my thoughts on the Vikings/Chargers game

So I spent a while watching and re-watching every play of the Vikings vs. Chargers game over the last couple of days. I used the NFL’s game re-wind service which includes a 10 second back up feature which is pretty useful for watching each play. On every play, I watched the blocking of each individual offensive lineman and each TE and watched every other player that the TV camera let me see. On defense, I basically watched whatever the TV camera let me. Here are my impressions:

1st and perhaps most surprising to me is that the Vikings didn’t play much differently in the 1st and 2nd halves. What differed in the 2nd half is that Rivers started to throw longer passes that mostly connected. The pass rush slowed down a bit and guys got open in the secondary. There were also some bad penalties (e.g. Cedric Griffin’s personal foul) on the Vikings defense in the 2nd half as well. In general though, both the offense and the defense played with the same strengths and weaknesses in both halves. In broad brush strokes, here’s my impression of the team’s performance:

O-line: The offensive line did reasonably well all things considered. They were better on running downs than passing downs. In general though, they pushed their guys off the line of scrimmage on running plays. I’d say that Hutchinson and Herrera had very good games. Johnson, despite others’ impression, was fine in my opinion. Sullivan was occasionally overmatched and Loadholt was slow. Those last two guys did not have particularly good games. On at least a couple of plays, I saw Sullivan get blown up. On one play he virtually flew backwards. Loadholt is starting to appear to me as being a slow version of 2010 McKinnie. That said, as a unit, the O-line did its job in my opinion. It wasn’t always pretty, but I think it was more effective than most people have given them credit for.

Unfortunately for the O-line Peterson missed A LOT of opportunities and had some screw ups too. In fact, I would come right out and say that in my opinion Peterson had a bad game. He was as physically gifted as ever during the game, but he made bad reads and decisions and more. He missed a number of opportunities on running plays throughout the game, and they were frustrating to watch. One play in the 4Q had me shocked. The O-line opened a barn-yard door size gap in the line between Hutch and Johnson and inexplicably Peterson ignored it and instead went inside for a 4 yard gain. There was at least 10 yards of open field through the gap, and a pretty decent chance that Peterson would have been gone. Peterson missed blocking assignments on pass rushes (no surprise there). However, at a critical moment in the game 4Q with 4 minutes remaining, McNabb went to hand off to Peterson but Peterson was on the wrong side of him. The play got blown up for a loss. It was a case of McNabb and the O-line heading one way and Peterson getting mixed up and going the other. All in all, not a good day of decision making for Peterson in my opinion. His mistakes cost the Vikings a lot of yardage and particularly so in the fourth quarter.

Another player that stood out for having an off day was Rudolph. He had trouble blocking throughout the game and also appeared to take on the wrong assignments. His blocking woes made a difference in at least two cases that immediately come to mind. In one case, Rudolph let his guy go straight at McNabb who ended up overthrowing Harvin to the outside as a result. On the play, Rudolph somehow decided to assist with an inside block (barely helped) and didn’t seem to notice his guy as he ran past him at the QB. It was very frustrating to watch as a fan who noticed the same stuff from Rudolph in pre-season, and I fear that if I were a coach I’d be significantly limiting his playing time.

Bernard Berrian did a good job of blocking through the game but ended up the game with a sum total of zero catches. To make matters worse, he dropped two balls. One ball was a low throw from McNabb (but appeared to be pretty catchable) on 3rd and 6 that was dropped by Berrian. It ended the drive. The other play is the well known 45 yard throw from McNabb that Berrian also dropped which also ended the drive. McNabb underthrew Berrian, but I believe that was as a result of pressure. McNabb was hit at virtually the same time he released the ball. Berrian adjusted to the ball well, but, as I said, dropped it. Berrian’s bobble-catch TD in the end zone during pre-season may have made believers out of some folks who had been sitting on the fence about Berrian, but I’m afraid Berrian’s ineffectiveness as a pass-catching receiver appears to be as before.

So, Peterson, Rudolph and Berrian were disappointments in my book. However, I was surprised and delighted to see Kleinsasser back to old form. He was a blocking machine. Last year was an off year for him, and I feared the worst. However, Kleinsasser had a really good game, and I was very happy to see that.

Also, I was pleased to see Gerhart take the yards that were given to him by the O-line. It was only two plays but he got yardage of 12 and 4 in those two consecutive plays. He didn’t bounce around like Peterson does. He just saw the hole and made his moves left and right without losing his forward momentum the way that Peterson typically does at or near the line. I hope we see more of Gerhart.

McNabb wasn’t great. He had some misses, but generally speaking, I think he did okay. He had a bad interception in which I think he turned and passed to Harvin too slowly. Later he had a bad bounce pass to Shank and threw to the wrong side of Harvin on a short yardage play that might have gone for more if Harvin hadn’t had to twirl around to catch the ball. However, in general, I think he did okay. Not great but not worthy of the pile of abuse he’s received thus far.

As for play calling, I actually think it was a lot different from the old Chilly days. There were a lot more 3 TE and 2 TE sets than I had realized after first watching the game. Rudolph didn’t help matters with his blocking when in the game, but in general, I liked the play calling. If Peterson hit the obvious holes and had Berrian caught his two 3rd down balls, I think we’d be talking about the San Diego game differently. One play I noticed that wasn’t commented on by the announcers was a play that Peterson took for a first down late in the 3rd quarter. On this play, Loadholt lined up at left tackle to the left of Johnson and Hutch. Herrera and Kleinsasser anchored the right. It was a cool play that worked well. After that play, the Vikings went Webb Cat and lost some significant momentum.

---

On the defensive side of the ball, I noticed a few things. Our DTs got pushed back on running plays. We used to get penetration on rushing plays with Kevin and Pat on the inside. Not so on Sunday. Our defensive ends did fine, but it was mostly the linebackers that seemed to be getting the penetration and tackles on running plays. That may have been by design and assignments. I don’t know. It was interesting to me though.

While Jared Allen obviously did well being dropped back into pass coverage, Awasom did not. At one point, I remember thinking, "Who on earth is that linebacker and what is he doing?"

On passing downs, we had a pretty good rush when the guys weren’t tired. The push up the middle stalled as the game wore on.

It was harder to see how our guys in the secondary did in coverage, because the cameras often just showed results rather than how the coverage unfolded. I was surprised at times by how deep our linebackers were playing. I feel that because Winfield is so good at tackling and blitzing that he’s often given a pass on his less-than-stellar coverage skills. He was not particularly effective in coverage, but he continued to make plays all over the field and was definitely fun to watch.

Cook had flashes of good and bad. My hope is that with experience he’ll limit the bad a bit more; too many penalties mostly.

At safety, Sanford seemed to play the best of the three (i.e. Abdullah, Sanford and Johnson) from what I could see. Abdullah caught my eye a couple of times making bad decisions and taking bad angles. Tyrell Johnson nearly cost the team a TD in the second quarter when he got confused again. You could see him moving towards the line of scrimmage before realizing the wide receiver was behind him and Rivers was going for it. Rivers overthrew the receiver in the end zone, and Johnson wasn’t even in the picture at that point. What’s it going to take to just give the job to Sanford full time?

Our linebackers played very well. Erin Henderson showed his youth a few times. He mostly looked good but got caught out of position on one play (a dink and dunk across the middle that went for big yardage).

---

As I said before, my takeaway from re-watching the game is that I don’t think the Vikings played much differently between the first half and the second half. What they did well in the 1st half, they did well in the 2nd. What they struggled with early, they struggled with late. My advice to the coaches is to sit Berrian, Tyrell Johnson and Rudolph. I don’t know what to do with Peterson’s decision making. I think that’s part of the overall Peterson package, and you just take the good with the bad. Just the same, I’d like to see a bit more of Gerhart. I think his style just may be more consistent and better able to take advantage of what our O-line can give. He won’t break the 40 yard runs, but I think he’ll consistently get the yards that are there. And this past weekend, I think that might have been enough to keep the chains moving.

Anyway, this ended up being longer than I intended. If you read through it all, thanks for sticking with it.

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.

Comment 49 comments  |  6 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

nice write up !!!

interesting assessment of adrian peterson. i have often been frustrated because he seems to fire off so quickly when the ball is snapped, and tends not to show patience in the backfield…like he desn’t hesitate to let the hole appear and runs right up the back of the o-line. i thought he was getting better at this, but your observation about his decision making makes me wonder if he has a weakness between the ears while behind the line of scrimmage. i hope the coaching staff can make it right.

i remember ladanian tomlinson showing everybody how to do it last year during the monday night game against the vikings, that was real great selective running by picking his holes and using his blockers well. come on adrian !!! we need to get you to the second level where nobody stands a chance against you !!!

warcraft, you are my guitar hero !!!

by danny lloyd on Sep 13, 2011 6:23 PM CDT reply actions  

Thanks.

Yes, I also remember Priest Holmes using his blockers exceptionally well when he was leading the league in rushing for the Chiefs – sometimes it looked like he was jogging as he kept a hand on the back of the lineman’s jersey and let his guys clear the way for him. He was an artist when it came to using blockers that way.

by kcskol on Sep 13, 2011 9:10 PM CDT up reply actions  

The day AP got 296

He followed his blocks beautifully. He was learning to do what Ladanian Tomlinson did from his first day as a rookie.

Problem is, Peterson is capable of moving so much faster than his blockers, he gets impatient. He wants to get downfield faster than everybody can catch up, which is understandable, but he winds up running into traffic before his blockers can do any good.

Timing is everything on a record-setting day, and AP got 296 yards on a day when he timed his cuts perfectly. Can he do it again? Sure, he’s capable, but his blockers will have to get there a lot quicker than this bunch has shown so far.

by jimbo55403 on Sep 14, 2011 12:26 AM CDT up reply actions  

Thanks for the analysis

I know you put a lot of time behind the computer to form these thoughts. We’ll see what next week brings against a lesser opponent at home. I would edit your recommendation on Berrian from “sit” to “cut” however. Guy is just horseshit.

by bender26 on Sep 13, 2011 6:43 PM CDT reply actions  

I suppose I was a tad diplomatic on that one.

I sort of figured that boat had sailed, but I wouldn’t argue with your recommendation for improvement. :-)

by kcskol on Sep 13, 2011 9:06 PM CDT up reply actions  

I wonder

on that play that you describe where Kleinsasser lines up as, effectively, the RT, is he still an eligible receiver. Does Loadholt have to report to the refs that he is eligible in that formation?

TiggerSr

by TiggerSr on Sep 13, 2011 6:52 PM CDT reply actions  

I don't really know all of the ins and outs...

…but a player wearing an ineligible receiver number (e.g. 71) must announce when they are an eligible receiver.

When, why and how they decide whether or not they are eligible is actually something I don’t know much about. I just listen for the ref to announce something.

by kcskol on Sep 13, 2011 9:04 PM CDT up reply actions  

I suspect

it depends on whether Kleisasser was “covered” by someone else on the line on his right, ie, a WR on the line on his right. If he was uncovered, I think that by definition makes him an “End” and thus an eligible receiver. So long as Loadholt was “covered” on the left side by another “End”, ie, a WR on the line on the left, that would make him a “Tackle” and ineligible as a receiver and thus he was not required to report to the refs as being an eliigible receiver.

TiggerSr

by TiggerSr on Sep 13, 2011 10:19 PM CDT up reply actions  

to be an eligible receiver

You have to be the end man on the line of scrimmage or in the backfield. The play you described however was just your basic tackle-over, over-balanced formation. Which 9/10 times is a running formation. It’s a numbers game that offensive coaches like to play. The defense usually aligns to the center, the strength of the formation and/or field. But a tackle-over formation creates an unbalanced offensive line and usually creates a mismatch based on alignment alone.

"I am patient with stupidity but not with those who are proud of it."

by NMVike on Sep 18, 2011 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions  

Great Read

I enjoyed reading your insights, and it makes me want to go back and watch the game to see if I noticed the same things.

SKOL

by CCNorsemen on Sep 13, 2011 7:01 PM CDT reply actions  

Awesome synopsis!

Thanks for the effort kc. Your observations sound spot-on and are encouraging. Everything sounds correctable and/or less of a concern. I think with AP we just take the bad with the good. Even though I agree it would be nice to see more of Toby, I also think that 20-25 carries for AP would have been enough to affect a different outcome.

What the hell is it with Frazier when it comes to Berrian? What does he see that we don’t? I did notice him blocking well, particularly on the 46-yard carry. Still, if he can’t make the critical catches he’s a liability.

by Jshore on Sep 13, 2011 7:08 PM CDT reply actions  

Re: What does Frazier sees in Berrian

Do you remember that case in which a couple of people attempted to extort money from Berrian by forcing him to pay them to get his phone back? Allegedly there were compromising photos on the phone. What do you want to bet one or two of them were of Frazier? How else can Frazier’s blindness to Berrian’s lack of talent be explained?

by kcskol on Sep 13, 2011 8:52 PM CDT up reply actions  

That was Extremely Impressive kcskol!

Since the article was only slightly shorter than Roots, I read through it rather quickly, but noticed very few if any typos.

My hope is that with experience he’ll limit the bad a bit more; too many penalties mostly.
It’s somewhat rare to find someone using a semicolon properly in a fan post (although we have a bright group here). I can’t argue with any thing you said. I’m hoping that you were being just a tad critical of AP as without a passing game, even if what might seem a hole, there’s likely a linebacker filling that gap – but I didn’t review the game with your voracity, so will take your word for it. You have a great inclination for doing this so keep it up. It would be an admirable and exciting career goal (or fun pass time) imo. We’ll do better against Tampa.

by abba7 on Sep 13, 2011 7:16 PM CDT reply actions  

I have an ex-girlfriend to thank

She broke my heart but taught me punctuation. Now years later I think of that as a good trade.

Thanks for the kind words. And yes, I’m hopeful that things will go better at the Metrodome against Tampa.

by kcskol on Sep 13, 2011 8:56 PM CDT up reply actions  

One play in the 4Q had me shocked. The O-line opened a barn-yard door size gap in the line between Hutch and Johnson and inexplicably Peterson ignored it and instead went inside for a 4 yard gain.

You’ve got to remember, from TV view, we can see over and around linemen. Peterson cannot. I’m positive he saw that gap, but the problem is, he can’t see around linemen to tell if theres a LB right on the other side of it. All night he looked for gaps, and when he saw one, he exploited it. Good RB’s find a hole and use it, they don’t look for bigger holes, they take what they can get. (TSG on pretty much everything)

The road to fulfillment in any line of endeavor is always marked by an initial breakthrough; however, that first taste of success needs to be replicated again and again in order for supremacy to be sustained. We are Vikings, and our breakthrough is now. We will get that first down, then get a touchdown. Then we'll kick your ass.

by Alittlemore_cowbell on Sep 13, 2011 9:26 PM CDT reply actions  

Yes, I realize that in the heat of the moment that things get missed and perspective change

Admittedly it’s pretty easy to second guess his decisions after the fact, and my viewing angle is different than his. All fair points. My only concern is that it seems to happen a decent amount with him. Speaking at the risk of being overly general, I think Peterson’s great gifts are his natural speed, strength, conditioning and agility. He’s an amazing athlete. However, I’m beginning to think that his RB IQ is perhaps even below average. (I know. I’m bracing for an onslaught of criticism here. Just saying what I’m thinking). Over the years, I’ve seen him rush the line too fast and too hard, choose the wrong holes, bounce laterally for a loss of momentum and no gain instead of lowing his head for the extra 2 or 3 yards, and flub countless blocking assignments on passing plays. Peterson is amazing and tons of fun to watch. He is perhaps a once a decade phenom at RB. However, he’s anything but a complete player at the position.

And this last point makes the $100M contract signing particularly interesting to me. Was it a football decision or a business decision? Peterson is a fan favorite. I love him too. My guess is that he puts more fans in the seats, sells more jerseys and gets the Vikings on national TV more than any other player on the team. However, if it were just on the basis of his on-the-field contributions, I wonder (as in thinking outloud on this one) if he’d have been given that $100M deal. My gut tells me that he’s average from a stats perspective EXCEPT for his ability to break the big play. I know. I know. That ability is amazing, but it’s unpredictable. Its impact drives his stat averages way up. I don’t have access to the statistics, and I could barely hang on in my stats class at school, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see Peterson in the middle of the pack if you took away the outlyer big gains. In fact, I thought I heard a year or two ago that Peterson had the highest number of negative yardage plays for running backs (That could be an incorrect fact, but I definitely heard it somewhere). I don’t think that can be entirely pinned on the O-line, because they were not one of the worst O-lines in the league. It could be stacking the box, but it could also be an issue with what Peterson seeing and does when he gets handed the ball. My sense of things (perhaps wrong) is that Peterson gets an average distribution of negative, small and medium yardage gains. It’s only when he gets to the 2nd level, that he really becomes the freak of nature and is as dangerous in space as any player the league has ever seen. And again, I think he could be getting a lot more yards if he showed better recognition in the backfield as he approaches the linen of scrimmage.

Again, despite what might come across as a very negative review of Peterson’s performance, I’m actually a big fan of his and wear his jersey with pride. However, he’s human and in my opinion he has some weaknesses that I don’t really hear people talk about.

And the normal caveat applies. This is but one amateur fan’s opinion.

Lastly, I’m unfamiliar with the TSG acronym. “Totally Super Good”? “Timid, Shy and Girly?” :-)

by kcskol on Sep 14, 2011 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions  

“That sounded gay” lol

The road to fulfillment in any line of endeavor is always marked by an initial breakthrough; however, that first taste of success needs to be replicated again and again in order for supremacy to be sustained. We are Vikings, and our breakthrough is now. We will get that first down, then get a touchdown. Then we'll kick your ass.

by Alittlemore_cowbell on Sep 14, 2011 4:01 PM CDT up reply actions  

LOL.

Good to know that acronym then.

by kcskol on Sep 14, 2011 6:52 PM CDT up reply actions  

Courtesy of DRusso from tomahawknation.com

That guy is hilarious.

The road to fulfillment in any line of endeavor is always marked by an initial breakthrough; however, that first taste of success needs to be replicated again and again in order for supremacy to be sustained. We are Vikings, and our breakthrough is now. We will get that first down, then get a touchdown. Then we'll kick your ass.

by Alittlemore_cowbell on Sep 14, 2011 8:45 PM CDT up reply actions  

Good read

I feel the biggest disappointment is Rudolph, a tight end who blocks that pathetically, should never see the field. 2nd round pick, big, tall, soft hands, sexy, HUGE disappointment. I’m sure they are trying to coach him in the art of blocking, but it apparently is falling on deaf ears. Kyle needs to try harder, lots harder, or he shouldn’t dress on Sunday.

by Duluth Viking on Sep 14, 2011 6:29 AM CDT reply actions  

I agree,

but I’ll leave the sexy part alone.

The road to fulfillment in any line of endeavor is always marked by an initial breakthrough; however, that first taste of success needs to be replicated again and again in order for supremacy to be sustained. We are Vikings, and our breakthrough is now. We will get that first down, then get a touchdown. Then we'll kick your ass.

by Alittlemore_cowbell on Sep 14, 2011 6:39 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions  

Maybe Peterson needs to be benched

Or a the least Gerhart and Booker should get at least half the snaps. I do wonder if Peterson wasn’t overly tired?

by emeyenburg on Sep 14, 2011 9:53 AM CDT reply actions  

Hope I didn't come across as advocating a 'benching'

However, I would like to see more of Gerhart. He’s good. Peterson is an amazing athlete, and I’m sure that the coaches will show him the missed opportunities. And truthfully, with his struggles in blocking for his QB, he sort has been benched in the past on 3rd down passing downs.

I doubt Peterson was tired. His conditioning is incredible, and they didn’t work him too hard.

by kcskol on Sep 14, 2011 10:33 AM CDT up reply actions  

great read

This was fun to read. Our DT play will come together again after Kevin gets back. Also, about Rudolph, he is a beast of an athlete. I think we should use Rudolph more as a receiver, or split wide or something and get him a mismatch.

SKOL

by MuskieVikesfan on Sep 14, 2011 9:56 AM CDT reply actions  

In pre-season, I did see them line Rudolph up at WR at least one time.

However, my concern is that he probably wouldn’t have been drafted if teams were looking for a WR. He doesn’t strike me as being particularly fleet of foot.

In my opinion, he just really, really, really needs to work on his blocking and assignment recognition. I guess that’s what practice is for. And until he proves he can block, I’d keep him off the field on plays in which his blocking role is critical to the success of the play.

by kcskol on Sep 14, 2011 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions  

Nice assessment, thanks for the extra time on this game tape

I’m sure the Viking’s staff gave this post and discussion a good read. It’s amazing to see how a short bit of playing time gets so much scrutiny. Hat’s off to you.

by VikesFanSince1967 on Sep 14, 2011 10:40 AM CDT reply actions  

The reason that I think football is so popular is...

…that it’s 90% anticipation. It gives people like me lots of time to think and talk about things. If they played 162 games a year, I doubt I’d spend half as much time on the topic as I currently do.

And thank you for the compliment. I’m pretty sure that the coaches stay away from stuff like this. My proof? Berrian’s still at WR. Tyrell Johnson still has a locker. Sullivan’s a starter at center. And Ponder is the 2nd string QB over Webb.

Surely somewhere in that list I’ve managed to discredit myself with most of the Minnesota fan base and most certainly the coaching staff. But that’s what happens when a rabid fan with some time on his hands deals with a sport that is 90% anticipation. :-)

by kcskol on Sep 14, 2011 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions  

Everyone seems to want to micromanage a real football team

A big credit to that is fantasy football leagues and insane coverage it gets. I can’t take it to your level. Thankfully I can just enjoy the game as it unfolds and the smart fan chatter here. For full disclaimer, I don’t do any fantasy football madness or it’d consume more hours of life than necessary. There’s a family, and other priorities worth spending time on. Ok, ok, maybe I do spend more time here than necessary which is part of being a vikings fan :)

by VikesFanSince1967 on Sep 14, 2011 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions  

I'm one of those odd ducks that's just not into fantasy football.

I don’t pay much attention to football unless it’s the Vikings. I might watch a team that’s going to play the Vikings during the year, but generally I’m just interested in what the Vikings are up to. That’s one reason why I wasn’t involved in a lot of the conversations about signing FAs this year. I might have my own thoughts about areas of weakness on our team, but I just don’t know enough about the talent on other teams (aside from the big name players in the league) to be able to suggest how to fill the need.

Perhaps that lack of interest in other teams is what makes me uninterested in fantasy football.

by kcskol on Sep 15, 2011 9:59 AM CDT up reply actions  

Tremendous write up

In other recaps and analysis (such as my recap), it is mostly just snap judgements and what we see just watching the game like everybody else. What you did takes a lot of time and effort, and I applaud you for it. Keep it up.

Boom Goes the Dynamite

by SDVike on Sep 14, 2011 11:25 AM CDT reply actions  

Thank you

And I enjoyed your recap as well. Game ball for the opposing player was a nice touch.. albeit a bit of salt in some very fresh wounds. :-)

by kcskol on Sep 14, 2011 1:09 PM CDT up reply actions  

yes do

loved the post; took a lot of time and effort to compose. and helps give us rabid fans a more stable perspective to really and truly evaluate our teams performance good or bad.

kudos my good man.

Will the Real Thor Please Stand Up ... ?

by the Real Thor on Sep 14, 2011 12:13 PM CDT reply actions  

Many thanks.

It did take a bit of time to write up, but I had the time and interest and have always sort of taken notes on my own when I’ve had access to recorded games. While I know I’ll always have the interest (and hence will also find the time), sometimes the schedule is such that I won’t get around to it until it’s no longer interesting to people. For example, I have been known to go back to games months later to put together my impression of what I saw. Weird, I know.

Anyway, I’m glad you enjoyed it. Thanks.

by kcskol on Sep 14, 2011 1:17 PM CDT up reply actions  

One of the best recaps I've ever read, thank you!!

You really dug deep into the footage, gotta appreciate that. And insightful, thank you!

On McNabb;

Not great but not worthy of the pile of abuse he’s received thus far.

39 yards, my friend. When you have Harvin, Jenkins, Shank, and Camy out there, there’s no justification for 39 yards total passing. Maybe if the game was primarily handoffs to AP and we had a 400yd rushing total, then it’s understandable. But yeah…. I think McNabb deserves a lot of skepticism right now.

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 Sep 14, 2011 12:15 PM CDT reply actions  

Okay. Yes. 39 yards is pretty awful.

However, I offer this in the spirit of it being just one guy’s opinion, but I had the same reaction you did after walking away from the TV Sunday evening. I was sort of disgusted with the effort on both sides of the ball given the 2nd half collapse.

That said, McNabb wasn’t throwing balls all over the place. He had a bad first play that was costly for the team. He underthrew two guys (Berrian and Shank). However, I get the sense that those balls were catchable. The announcers said that Shank simply dropped the ball as he fell to the ground. I dunno. I couldn’t really see it.

I do know that I’ve seen games in which the QB has been out of it. Tavaris Jackson in years past is an example. Christian Ponder during all but two series of the pre-season (which is not to say he won’t be great someday). McNabb had a low stat day that was not good, but it wasn’t in the same neighborhood as a bad QB having a bad day. He was let down by two dropped balls (3 if you include Shank’s drop) that would have had the effect of tripling his yardage and bringing up his completion to 10 of 15. That would have been a respectable day. I know that’s coulda, woulda, shoulda talk there, but I’m not as disappointed in him as I was after first watching the game on Sunday. We’ll see. I’ve got my fingers crossed and am hoping for good things.

by kcskol on Sep 14, 2011 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions  

I see it the same way

I saw McNaab make two really bad throws. Other than that, it’s hard to tell what went wrong, although it is not hard to tell that SOMETHING went wrong. How to fix it? Maybe its better execution by OL, WRs,TE in blocking, or RB in blitz pickeup - that’s what Frazier implied in press conference. Maybe its better play calling. Maybe its AD making better cuts and giving McNaab more opportunities to throw. I dunno, but I am hoping Musgrave can do so. The past (both Musgrave’s and McNaab’s) suggests it will be fixed. I think it is absurd to think that McNaab has deteriorated so much that he is now no better, or worse than Spurgeon Wynn.

TiggerSr

by TiggerSr on Sep 14, 2011 1:25 PM CDT up reply actions  

I think we'd go a long way to improving things...

…if we could stop the self-inflicted wounds. That is part of why I suggested sitting Berrian, Rudolph and Tyrell Johnson. Most of the really awful errors disappear if those guys aren’t on the field. Also, I’d ban the checkdown quick pass to the single WR on the edge (i.e. the kind of play that lead to the interception in the 1st quarter). It’s always been high risk, and even when thrown by Favre, it rarely got any yardage unless it was a double set with a WR there to block.

by kcskol on Sep 15, 2011 9:54 AM CDT up reply actions  

Good review kcskol

When I did my review in Ted’s article, I was basically just making snap judgements. It was nice to read the review after you re-watched the tape.

I’d probably disagree on the Peterson RB IQ comments but, he has shown he likes to run up field before his blockers get there before. That I cannot argue with.

Berrian should be cut though.

by FSUViking on Sep 14, 2011 12:53 PM CDT reply actions  

Thanks for going easy on me regarding the Peterson comment.

I expected to get tarred and feathered… but the day is still young and more may stop by and read this post this week. :-)

by kcskol on Sep 14, 2011 1:07 PM CDT up reply actions  

KC, this is front page material

I’m sorry I’m just seeing it now. Helluva write up, and thanks for taking the time to post your observations. I agree on the o-line, and I think that’s why Musgrave went so run heavy. It’s a decent run blocking line, and if he can set up the run so the Vikings can work some play action, it will help the o-line.

For the secondary, agree completely on Cook—I think he showed some flashes of real potential, but also had some mistakes, which I think we can attribute to youth and inexperience. One thing I did notice was how many missed tackles the defense had, which is something I am not used to seeing.

Great job, dude. Really enjoyed the post.

"I'm crazy? Cyril, you're the one who killed a perfectly good hooker!"--Sterling Archer

The Daily Norseman
Off Tackle Empire
SB Nation Minnesota

by Ted Glover on Sep 14, 2011 9:04 PM CDT reply actions  

You know what front page material is?

(and you were right about this review btw) – but the article (I just ran across it tonight) that you wrote for Off Tackle Empire with all of the choppers. That was extremely cool and well done and can be seen here> http://www.offtackleempire.com/2011/9/12/2418366/big-ten-power-poll-post-week-2#comments I enjoy reading about things military and found it most interesting how you did that.

by abba7 on Sep 14, 2011 10:48 PM CDT up reply actions  

Thanks, much appreciated

"I'm crazy? Cyril, you're the one who killed a perfectly good hooker!"--Sterling Archer

The Daily Norseman
Off Tackle Empire
SB Nation Minnesota

by Ted Glover on Sep 15, 2011 7:10 AM CDT up reply actions  

Nice compliment. Thanks.

Lesser men, and perhaps men not married to a loving yet tells-you-like-it-is kind of gal, could be at risk of getting an inflated ego over praise like this. However, if by some chance, I do start going all egotistical (e.g. demanding my corn flakes be hand crushed in the morning, my newspaper ironed and my children silent while I eat), I hope you will help me to find a sofa to sleep on. It’ll be your fault after all. :-)

by kcskol on Sep 15, 2011 9:47 AM CDT up reply actions  

Good reads..

Good honest touch Kc. Its how I saw it also and noted else where, not so much we lost a nice lead and lost. Fact is the Chargers started slow and adjusted and simply beat us.
Some of these things are fixable, yet Im still seeing a long season of “getting it together”
Its a hodge podge of talent from great to average, and seriously no down field pass threat. Again nice write up!

@}-----You've been Touched-----{@

by Velvetouch on Sep 15, 2011 11:19 AM CDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

DN strives to be the best blog about the Minnesota Vikings on the internet, doing so with a unique blend of insight and analysis, as well as (hopefully) wit and humor. We hope you enjoy the site, and make it your home for Minnesota Vikings info!

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
You Can Breathe Slightly Easier
Small
Vikings Roster Analysis: Secondary
Russian_arms_control_small
Season in Review: Chris Cook's Best and Worst performances in 2011
Biggun_small
1st New Vikes Stadium Image

Recent FanPosts

Jg_small
UBVs Special| Trivia! Can you name the Minnesota Vikings Starting QBs?
Small
Roster Analysis: Quarterbacks
Biggun_small
SUCK IT MARTY! - Stadium Passes MPLS 7-6
Imagescaj02y87_small
We get NO RESPECT!
Small
Supplemental Draft and our Safety Situation
Small
Vikings Roster Analysis: Receivers and Tight ends
Grover_small
Purple Kool Aid - Oh Ya!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Photo_10_small
Percy Harvin and the 2012-13 Passing Game

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Triangle Of Authority

Dailynorseman_small Christopher Gates

Ted_logo_small Ted Glover

Victory__small Eric J. Thompson

Assistant Coaches

Minnesota-vikings-logo_small MarkSP18

Wiggy_7_small Skol Girl

Headshot_small KJSegall