You know you’re having a bad day at the office when Fox’s sixth-string announcing crew of Ron Pitts and JC Pearson are skewering you in the broadcast booth over some of your coaching decisions. However, Pitts and Pearson won’t be the last media types to quiz Vikings head coach Brad Childress about some of his questionable decisions as the team lost its third game in a row, 23-16 to the hated Green Bay Packers.
One question Childress will likely be forced to answer over and over during the next few days is why his best offensive player - Adrian Peterson - only got his hands on the ball three times (it jumps up to six if you count kick off returns) in the second half. Chilly will no doubt say Peterson’s workload was dictated in part by the fact the Packers had the ball for over 20 minutes in the second half. Whatever. It’s still unacceptable that with Peterson averaging 9.3 yards a carry during the game, Chilly could not find a way to get the ball into his hands more, a point the usually clueless Pearson kept making over and over in the second half as the game slowly slipped away from the Vikings.
Just a puzzling as Peterson’s lack of touches when he was in the game were the times he wasn’t in the ball game at all. As expected, Childress stuck to his guns and started Chester Taylor – back after missing two games due to injury - and then alternated Taylor and Peterson essentially series-by-series. That strategy in itself was highly questionable. But even more so was the fact that when the Vikings did get deep into Packers territory, it was Taylor who was often in the game, not Peterson - even though the rookie had scored two of the Vikings three offensive touchdowns going into the Green Bay game. And once again, Peterson was not on the field as the Vikings drove for the tying score in their final drive of the game.
Vikings fans will be waiting to see how Childress handles the running back situation during the bye week and leading up to the Chicago game in two weeks time. Outside of a nice 37-yard run in the third quarter, Taylor was mostly ineffective, often getting stopped for itty-bitty gains or negative yardage. Meanwhile, Peterson racked up 112 yards on just 12 carries.
A two-headed running back philosophy works well on a good team with a potent offensive attack that can sustain long drives and move the ball consistently enough so there are enough carries to go around for two backs. But the Vikings don’t have that kind of offence and it’s time to do away with this co-starting running back nonsense.
Don’t get me wrong, I like Taylor, but the offence is sputtering and needs an explosive player like Peterson capable of taking a simple hand off or a screen pass and ripping off big gains. Taylor just isn’t that kind of back. He’s a luxury the Vikings can’t afford right now because when he’s playing, Peterson is not. If Childress has any hope of saving the season, he needs to realize his offence needs more of Peterson, not less. And Peterson certainly shouldn’t be standing on the sidelines as he has been during the past three losses with the game on the line.
Other stuff
Of course, the Vikings woes on offence go much deeper than Chilly’s decision to keep his only offensive playmaker off the field at critical junctures. The offensive line’s pass protection gets worse every game and left tackle Bryant McKinnie once again did his best impersonation of a turnstile. But this time his poor play cost him, as the Vikings staff finally benched him (what took them so long?) after McKinnie whiffed hopelessly on Kabeer Gbaja Biamila and gave up a sack that nearly killed the fourth quarter drive where the Vikings offence scored its first touchdown in 20 possessions.
Artis Hicks, of all people, took over for McKinnie and fared better. It’s doubtful this will be a permanent move – McKinnie makes too money to be sitting on the bench. But it will be interesting to see how the $48.5-million dollar man reacts to the benching. Will it motivate McKinnie to start playing up to the standard normally expected of a highly paid left tackle? Or will he spend the bye week busily organizing another team cruise on Lake Minnetonka?
The Vikings were also done in by the flawed NFL instant replay system for the second week in a row. No explanation was given to the Metrodome crowd as to why the Vikings were not allowed to challenge a fourth quarter pass to the Packers Korey Hall that looked like a catch and a fumble but was ruled incomplete by the officials. Head zebra Ed Hoculi certainly offered no explanation, so it would have been nice to know how such a critical play could be unchallengeable when just a few plays later Childress was allowed to challenge (and what an idiotic challenge it was) the spot of the ball after the Packers had picked up a crucial first down.
Whatever the reasoning, the NFL needs to clear this up for next season. If a coach has only a limited number of challenges per half, he should be able to challenge any play he wishes. It’s a fast game, the refs make mistakes and that’s why we have instant reply – to correct those mistakes. But it didn’t happen in this case and it cost the Vikings dearly.
The Vikings also weren’t very happy that the zebras failed to penalize Charles Woodson’s mugging of Bobby Wade that led to a tipped pass that the Packers intercepted to seal the win. Notwithstanding the fact Woodson should have been called pass interference on the play, there are two points to keep in mind here.
Point number one: The Green Bay defensive ends had clearly jumped off side prior to the snap and at that point Vikings quarterback Kelly Holcomb should have called for the ball to be snapped immediately. That would have resulted in an offside penalty on the Packers, the ball would have been moved five yards closer to the Packers end zone and it would have stopped the clock. Great teams like the Patriots and the Colts led by great quarterbacks would have snapped that ball. It’s a smart play. But Holcomb didn’t. In fact, he let the Green Bay players get back in position before calling for the snap. I don’t get it.
Point number two: What is Holcomb doing throwing it in there anyway? There was no chance Wade would catch that ball and every chance something bad could happen, like the ball getting tipped and landing in the hands of a lucky Packers defender, which is exactly what happened. But I guess those are the things that occur when you’re depending on Kelly Holcomb to lead you to a fourth quarter comeback rather than Brett Favre or John Elway.
It’s funny, when Vikings owner Zygi Wilf quickly hired Childress to take over a team that went 9-7 under Mike Tice in 2005, Chilly was touted as the coach who would help the team close the gap on the Chicago Bears and lead them to an NFC North title. Now it’s 2007, the Vikings and Bears are both 1-3 and looking up at the Detroit Lions (3-1) and the 4-0 Packers. What a short, strange trip it’s been.
On Deck: Rookie report card
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Pack Outed
There was an interesting piece written by Ned Macey on the Football Outsiders website earlier this week (“Any Given Sunday: Packers over Chargers”) where he breaks down how Green Bay knocked off San Diego 31-24 last week. Of note in that lengthy article, Macey writes:
…the Packers ran quick slant after quick slant after quick slant and watched Favre fit balls consistently into tight spaces. Receiver Donald Driver was back to doing what he does best: catching balls in tight coverage…Favre dropped back 47 times and was only sacked twice. The Packers were almost never leaving in an extra blocker, content to spread out the Chargers and throw quick passes. Favre occasionally could not find an early option because of the tight man coverage, but even then he was able to sit in the pocket and scan the defense for one of his receivers to break free.
The Packers will do more of the same Sunday against the Vikings. It has to because Green Bay has no running game but also because every coach in the NFL knows the way to move the ball against the Vikings defence is to pass, pass and pass some more. What to do about the Packers pass happy ways? Well, the Vikings can hope for the best – with the best being Favre has one of his patented off games and throws three or four picks. Or, new defensive coordinator Leslie Frazier can be proactive and try a few things.
One thing Frazier might want to consider is to listen to one of his best players. Antoine Winfield has publicly lobbied that the coaches let him go mano-a-mano on Driver all game long. We’ll know for sure this afternoon whether Winfield’s lobbying was successful. But Chilly’s vague answer to a reporter’s question on this subject earlier in the week (“It’s really kind of more in-depth than that.”) leads me to believe it ain’t gonna happen.
My limited understanding of the Cover Two defence, which the Vikings employ, is that having a corner shadow a particular receiver goes against the defence’s basic principle of having your corners cover an underneath zone along with the linebackers. However, there are variations to the basic Cover Two. One of those is to have your corners and linebackers cover receivers man-to-man. Frazier should give this a try. This happens in other sports. If the San Antonio Spurs want to slow down LeBron James, Bruce Bowen guards him all game, not Tony Parker. If the Wild want to stop Sidney Crosby, they put their best checking centre on him all night. You’re telling me you can’t do the same thing in pro football? Don’t you want your best players matched up against the other team’s best players?
Driver killed the Vikings last year in the Metrodome. The Vikings can’t let it happen again. I’m liking the team’s chances of preventing it from happening a whole lot more if it’s Winfield’s on Driver rather than Cedric Griffin or Marcus McCauley. But maybe this makes too much sense.
In other news, Kelly Holcomb gets his second start with the Vikings today and it looks like Chester Taylor is back as the starting running back and Adrian Peterson will be coming off the bench. Ugggh!
…the Packers ran quick slant after quick slant after quick slant and watched Favre fit balls consistently into tight spaces. Receiver Donald Driver was back to doing what he does best: catching balls in tight coverage…Favre dropped back 47 times and was only sacked twice. The Packers were almost never leaving in an extra blocker, content to spread out the Chargers and throw quick passes. Favre occasionally could not find an early option because of the tight man coverage, but even then he was able to sit in the pocket and scan the defense for one of his receivers to break free.
The Packers will do more of the same Sunday against the Vikings. It has to because Green Bay has no running game but also because every coach in the NFL knows the way to move the ball against the Vikings defence is to pass, pass and pass some more. What to do about the Packers pass happy ways? Well, the Vikings can hope for the best – with the best being Favre has one of his patented off games and throws three or four picks. Or, new defensive coordinator Leslie Frazier can be proactive and try a few things.
One thing Frazier might want to consider is to listen to one of his best players. Antoine Winfield has publicly lobbied that the coaches let him go mano-a-mano on Driver all game long. We’ll know for sure this afternoon whether Winfield’s lobbying was successful. But Chilly’s vague answer to a reporter’s question on this subject earlier in the week (“It’s really kind of more in-depth than that.”) leads me to believe it ain’t gonna happen.
My limited understanding of the Cover Two defence, which the Vikings employ, is that having a corner shadow a particular receiver goes against the defence’s basic principle of having your corners cover an underneath zone along with the linebackers. However, there are variations to the basic Cover Two. One of those is to have your corners and linebackers cover receivers man-to-man. Frazier should give this a try. This happens in other sports. If the San Antonio Spurs want to slow down LeBron James, Bruce Bowen guards him all game, not Tony Parker. If the Wild want to stop Sidney Crosby, they put their best checking centre on him all night. You’re telling me you can’t do the same thing in pro football? Don’t you want your best players matched up against the other team’s best players?
Driver killed the Vikings last year in the Metrodome. The Vikings can’t let it happen again. I’m liking the team’s chances of preventing it from happening a whole lot more if it’s Winfield’s on Driver rather than Cedric Griffin or Marcus McCauley. But maybe this makes too much sense.
In other news, Kelly Holcomb gets his second start with the Vikings today and it looks like Chester Taylor is back as the starting running back and Adrian Peterson will be coming off the bench. Ugggh!
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Reversal of fortune
With Brett Favre and the (gag) 3-0 Green Bay Packers visiting the Metrodome this Sunday, I can’t help but think of the Anchorman scene where rival anchor guy Wes Mantooth says to Ron Burgundy:
“Ron Burgundy, at the bottom of my gut, with every inch of me, I plain straight hate you. But dammit, I respect you!”
That pretty much sums up my feelings towards the Pack’s Number 4. There isn’t a Green Bay player I hate more than Favre. And one of the great pleasures in life is watching him stink it up against the Vikings. I’m pretty sure most Vikings fans feel the same way.
But I do grudgingly respect the prick. He’s earned that much – even if it is nauseating to hear the Madden’s, the Aikman’s, the Theisman’s and the Simms’s of the broadcast world deify Favre season after season, blaming his receivers for not running the right routes every time he throws an interception (yeah, right), bringing up 100 times a game how much of a gamer he is and how much fun he has playing (I get it) and on and on the silliness goes.
Anyway, one of the storylines that will be dredged up this week is how Favre has historically struggled in dome stadiums and in the Metrodome (5-10 lifetime) in particular. This will be viewed as some kind of ace in the hole for the Vikings. But wait a minute – a quick Google search of past Vikings-Packers game logs shows that since 2003, Favre and the Packers have actually played better, much better, at the Metrodome than on the frozen tundra of Lambeau Field.
It’s true. Favre’s been loving life in Minnesota lately. In just about every important statistical category since 2003, he’s a far superior player in the Metrodome than Lambeau. Firstly, in the stat that matters the most – wins and losses – the Packers are 3-1 in the Metrodome since ’03 but just 2-4 (I’m including the Vikes 31-17 2005 wildcard win over the Pack in these totals) at Lambeau.
But what about other stuff like his quarterback rating? More troubling statistics, I’m afraid. Favre hasn’t had a QB rating less than 100 in the dome since 2002 and his average from 2003-2006 is an All-Pro-like 109.1. At Lambeau, Favre’s rating is a Harrington-like 72.7. He’s had only one game there where his quarterback rating was 100 or better since 2003.
How about passing yards? It’s not as big an edge but Favre’s still fared better at the Metrodome than Lambeau Field. He’s thrown for 1,221 yards during this period at the Metrodome and for 1,212 yards in Lambeau.
Touchdowns then? Sorry, Favre in the Metrodome trumps Favre in Lambeau once again. The living legend has thrown 10 touchdown passes in the dome during that span and eight in Lambeau. And get this: He’s thrown just two interceptions in the dome since 2003 but he’s thrown 16 in games played at Lambeau. So much for Favre’s struggles in the Metrodome.
I don't pretend to know why Favre’s played so well in the dome in recent years after playing so poorly there most of his Packer career. Maybe it's just one of those things. But the trend isn’t a good one for a Vikings team trying to snap a two-game losing streak and fighting to keep its season on the rails. With the Minnesota offence struggling to put together consecutive first downs, let alone score points, it figures this game needs to be low scoring for the Vikings to have a chance. In order for that to happen, Favre needs to play badly during his annual visit to the Twin Cities. Too bad he hasn’t been obliging in recent seasons.
Come to think of it, with the way Brad Childress has built this team, the Vikings have a much better chance of beating the Packers outdoors, at Lambeau Field, in November or December with sloppy field conditions than it does inside the friendly confines of the Metrodome. Such a scenario would suit the Vikings style of play. In these conditions, having a non-existent passing game wouldn't be as much of a liability, Childress could run Peterson and Taylor until they dropped, play the field position game and hope the elements and field conditions could slow down the Packers passing attack and cause Favre to turn the ball over.
However, at the Metrodome, Favre and the Packers won’t have to worry about wind, rain, sleet, snow or a mucky and slippery field. They’ll be playing indoors, on field turf and in controlled conditions. That should be to the Pack's advantage.
On Deck: Winfield’s request
“Ron Burgundy, at the bottom of my gut, with every inch of me, I plain straight hate you. But dammit, I respect you!”
That pretty much sums up my feelings towards the Pack’s Number 4. There isn’t a Green Bay player I hate more than Favre. And one of the great pleasures in life is watching him stink it up against the Vikings. I’m pretty sure most Vikings fans feel the same way.
But I do grudgingly respect the prick. He’s earned that much – even if it is nauseating to hear the Madden’s, the Aikman’s, the Theisman’s and the Simms’s of the broadcast world deify Favre season after season, blaming his receivers for not running the right routes every time he throws an interception (yeah, right), bringing up 100 times a game how much of a gamer he is and how much fun he has playing (I get it) and on and on the silliness goes.
Anyway, one of the storylines that will be dredged up this week is how Favre has historically struggled in dome stadiums and in the Metrodome (5-10 lifetime) in particular. This will be viewed as some kind of ace in the hole for the Vikings. But wait a minute – a quick Google search of past Vikings-Packers game logs shows that since 2003, Favre and the Packers have actually played better, much better, at the Metrodome than on the frozen tundra of Lambeau Field.
It’s true. Favre’s been loving life in Minnesota lately. In just about every important statistical category since 2003, he’s a far superior player in the Metrodome than Lambeau. Firstly, in the stat that matters the most – wins and losses – the Packers are 3-1 in the Metrodome since ’03 but just 2-4 (I’m including the Vikes 31-17 2005 wildcard win over the Pack in these totals) at Lambeau.
But what about other stuff like his quarterback rating? More troubling statistics, I’m afraid. Favre hasn’t had a QB rating less than 100 in the dome since 2002 and his average from 2003-2006 is an All-Pro-like 109.1. At Lambeau, Favre’s rating is a Harrington-like 72.7. He’s had only one game there where his quarterback rating was 100 or better since 2003.
How about passing yards? It’s not as big an edge but Favre’s still fared better at the Metrodome than Lambeau Field. He’s thrown for 1,221 yards during this period at the Metrodome and for 1,212 yards in Lambeau.
Touchdowns then? Sorry, Favre in the Metrodome trumps Favre in Lambeau once again. The living legend has thrown 10 touchdown passes in the dome during that span and eight in Lambeau. And get this: He’s thrown just two interceptions in the dome since 2003 but he’s thrown 16 in games played at Lambeau. So much for Favre’s struggles in the Metrodome.
I don't pretend to know why Favre’s played so well in the dome in recent years after playing so poorly there most of his Packer career. Maybe it's just one of those things. But the trend isn’t a good one for a Vikings team trying to snap a two-game losing streak and fighting to keep its season on the rails. With the Minnesota offence struggling to put together consecutive first downs, let alone score points, it figures this game needs to be low scoring for the Vikings to have a chance. In order for that to happen, Favre needs to play badly during his annual visit to the Twin Cities. Too bad he hasn’t been obliging in recent seasons.
Come to think of it, with the way Brad Childress has built this team, the Vikings have a much better chance of beating the Packers outdoors, at Lambeau Field, in November or December with sloppy field conditions than it does inside the friendly confines of the Metrodome. Such a scenario would suit the Vikings style of play. In these conditions, having a non-existent passing game wouldn't be as much of a liability, Childress could run Peterson and Taylor until they dropped, play the field position game and hope the elements and field conditions could slow down the Packers passing attack and cause Favre to turn the ball over.
However, at the Metrodome, Favre and the Packers won’t have to worry about wind, rain, sleet, snow or a mucky and slippery field. They’ll be playing indoors, on field turf and in controlled conditions. That should be to the Pack's advantage.
On Deck: Winfield’s request
Monday, September 24, 2007
The reviews are in
Today I checked out as many Vikings-related blogs as I could to see if anybody was as horrified as I was by the team’s performance against the Kansas City Chiefs. Well, it appears the Vikings blogging community is almost unanimous in thinking their favourite football team stinks. There’s barely a whiff of hope out there right now.
Anyway, here is a taste of what Vikings bloggers thought of the team’s play yesterday if you didn’t get a chance to scan the posts made at the various sites.
I thought LAST year's offense was bad. I'd give my left arm for that this season. Childress claims that this offense is "kick ass." Well, as far as that assessment goes, he's half right. (I'll let you decide which half.)
The Daily Norseman
It's never a good sign when you have to try hard to come up with three stars, rather than having to weed out undeserving candidates. Everyone on the offense not named Adrian Peterson was immediately eliminated for the most pathetic half of football since the game at Green Bay last year (another bad sign – that was only five games ago.)
The Ragnarok
I’d like to issue a formal apology to Turk McBride - you were right, our tackles are soft. Actually, they’re worse than soft - they’re comical. Like a couple of stooges who, if they found a third stooge, could become some kind of slapstick comedy act.
The Viking Age
McKinnie is the most overrated LT in the league and he kills us at times… I wish more than anything we could trade him or cut him and recoup salary cap.
Purple Kool-Aid
One can forgive Chilly if he missed Sunday's scores given the return of his obsession with burying his face in his play card only to make horrible offensive decisions in the face of adversity. Vikes Geek
There's a legitimate worry that by the time the offense is no longer inept, the defense will be old and on the way down. But if the Vikings don't surprise some teams over the next five games, that might be some other coach's problem to worry about.
AOL Fanhouse
Fact: The only Vikings regular season in our memory that has not invoked multiple weekly screams of “What are you doing?!” is the season we don’t speak about. They don’t just lose. They angry up the blood.
Randball
And my personal favourite....
Bryant McKinnie is the biggest, laziest piece of shit I have ever seen play left tackle in my life.
Skol Vikings
On Deck: Pack Attack
Anyway, here is a taste of what Vikings bloggers thought of the team’s play yesterday if you didn’t get a chance to scan the posts made at the various sites.
I thought LAST year's offense was bad. I'd give my left arm for that this season. Childress claims that this offense is "kick ass." Well, as far as that assessment goes, he's half right. (I'll let you decide which half.)
The Daily Norseman
It's never a good sign when you have to try hard to come up with three stars, rather than having to weed out undeserving candidates. Everyone on the offense not named Adrian Peterson was immediately eliminated for the most pathetic half of football since the game at Green Bay last year (another bad sign – that was only five games ago.)
The Ragnarok
I’d like to issue a formal apology to Turk McBride - you were right, our tackles are soft. Actually, they’re worse than soft - they’re comical. Like a couple of stooges who, if they found a third stooge, could become some kind of slapstick comedy act.
The Viking Age
McKinnie is the most overrated LT in the league and he kills us at times… I wish more than anything we could trade him or cut him and recoup salary cap.
Purple Kool-Aid
One can forgive Chilly if he missed Sunday's scores given the return of his obsession with burying his face in his play card only to make horrible offensive decisions in the face of adversity. Vikes Geek
There's a legitimate worry that by the time the offense is no longer inept, the defense will be old and on the way down. But if the Vikings don't surprise some teams over the next five games, that might be some other coach's problem to worry about.
AOL Fanhouse
Fact: The only Vikings regular season in our memory that has not invoked multiple weekly screams of “What are you doing?!” is the season we don’t speak about. They don’t just lose. They angry up the blood.
Randball
And my personal favourite....
Bryant McKinnie is the biggest, laziest piece of shit I have ever seen play left tackle in my life.
Skol Vikings
On Deck: Pack Attack
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Superbad
As the Vikings offence fumbled, bumbled and stumbled its way to a scoreless second half and lost to the Kansas City Chiefs 13-10, it seemed fitting that on a desperate last play where the Vikings tried to pull off a Cal-Stanford-style lateral miracle, the ball ended up in the hand’s of Vikings left guard Steve Hutchinson.
Unfortunately the hulking 300-pounder couldn’t take it to the house like Cal did that day some 20-odd years ago, instead he fumbled the ball away trying to lateral it one more time in an attempt to keep the play alive. Now the Vikings aren’t paying Hutchinson $49-million for his scoring ability. But with the notable exception of Adrian Peterson, Hutchinson’s about as big a threat to score as any other offensive player the Vikings have in uniform these days.
And the offence – or lack of an offence – is why the Vikings lost this game and look like they will lose many more in Brad Childress’s second (and last?) season as head coach in Minnesota. The Vikings have no offence when the ball isn’t in Peterson’s hands. With the exception of third-down back Mewelde Moore and the injured Chester Taylor, they don’t have a single player besides Peterson who can make a play. Its wide receivers can’t get open or hold onto the ball when they do. Its quarterbacks can’t hit those receivers the rare time they do get open and its right and left tackles can’t pass block.
There is no quick fix here for the Vikings. Certainly sticking Kelly Holcomb at quarterback for the apparently too-injured-to-play Tarvaris Jackson (although he was in uniform) didn’t provide much spark. Holcomb’s numbers (14 for 28, 165 yards, 0 TDs and 0 INTs) weren’t bad by Jackson’s low standards. He also looked more poised in the pocket than Jackson but, as expected, he wasn’t able to escape trouble when his offensive line failed to protect him, which was often.
Holcomb also showed the rustiness of a guy who hadn’t played a single game since 2005. In the second quarter, with the Vikings driving in Chiefs territory, the K.C. defence bit on some play action and Robert Ferguson got wide open behind the Chiefs secondary. One problem: Holcomb, who actually had time to throw, slightly overthrew Ferguson. The pass slipped harmlessly through Ferguson’s fingertips and fell to the ground and instead of being up 17-3; the Vikings were still only up 10-3. Two consecutive sacks later, the Vikings were out of field goal range and had to punt the ball away. It was a huge missed opportunity in a game where opportunities were hard to come by for the Vikings and it came back to bite them in the ass.
Overall, Holcomb’s play was uninspiring. He showed he may not be as prone to making as many ill-advised throws as the inexperienced Jackson but he’s no game breaker, either. However, he will probably get another shot against Green Bay next Sunday.
Along with Holcomb’s lukewarm play, the Vikings wide outs also deserve a fair share of the blame for yet another poor offensive performance. Peterson and Moore continue to be the team’s best receivers. Unfortunately, they are running backs by trade. Bobby Wade is decent working in the middle of the field and making a few yards after the catch but he’s best suited as your third or fourth receiver, not your number one guy. The rest of the crew are non-factors, although rookie Sidney Rice has nice hands and might be a player in another season or two. Think a guy like Plaxico Burress – whom the Vikings chose not to pursue as a replacement for Randy Moss in 2005 – could be of some service right about now?
And what would a post-game analysis of a Vikings game be without some bitching about the play of the team’s offensive line? Once again, the line, particularly in the second half, failed to give its quarterback nearly enough time to throw the ball. The Chiefs registered five sacks, numerous quarterback hurries and tipped balls and forced Holcomb to throw under duress much of the game.
Left tackle Byrant McKinnie might want to cover his eyes when the O-line breaks down the game film this week. Matched up against the Chiefs Jared Allen most of the day, Allen looked like the second coming of Deacon Jones and registered eight tackles, two sacks, a forced fumble and had two tipped passes. McKinnie also was the guy giving up the sack to Tamba Hali on the final drive that virtually sealed the win for the Chiefs. On the play, McKinnie showed why he will never be anything more than a run-of-the-mill left tackle and why the team’s management must have been smoking some wicked ganga when it signed him to a multi-million dollar contract extension last year.
Hali rushed wide off the snap, a smart move because the lumbering McKinnie couldn’t turn his hips quickly enough to cut off Hali and get his hands on him. As a result, Hali was pretty much untouched and crunched into a defenceless Holcomb shortly thereafter. It’s a sight we’ve seen far too often the past two seasons from McKinnie. He continues to set a low standard of play that the rest of the line seems to be trying to live down to.
You can also point some blame the defence’s way, if you care to. You could point to the fact the unit didn’t force enough turnovers against a lackluster Kansas City offence, couldn’t get much pressure on the mediocre Damon Huard and gave up too many big passing plays, again, in the second half. However, the defence still gave up only 13 points. And you can’t expect the defence to score a touchdown or two every game. Isn’t that the offence’s job?
The optimists will look at Sunday’s game and say the apparent blown call on Visanthe Shiancoe’s second quarter touchdown catch that was ruled incomplete cost the Vikings this game. That sort of optimism misses the point though. The fact is the Vikings offence can’t score. It is a liability just like it was much of 2006. Childress and his hand-picked lackey, Darrell Bevell, can talk all they want about seeing improvement but to borrow a phrase from a former Vikings coach, Denny Green, the Vikings offence is who we thought they were – Superbad.
Unfortunately the hulking 300-pounder couldn’t take it to the house like Cal did that day some 20-odd years ago, instead he fumbled the ball away trying to lateral it one more time in an attempt to keep the play alive. Now the Vikings aren’t paying Hutchinson $49-million for his scoring ability. But with the notable exception of Adrian Peterson, Hutchinson’s about as big a threat to score as any other offensive player the Vikings have in uniform these days.
And the offence – or lack of an offence – is why the Vikings lost this game and look like they will lose many more in Brad Childress’s second (and last?) season as head coach in Minnesota. The Vikings have no offence when the ball isn’t in Peterson’s hands. With the exception of third-down back Mewelde Moore and the injured Chester Taylor, they don’t have a single player besides Peterson who can make a play. Its wide receivers can’t get open or hold onto the ball when they do. Its quarterbacks can’t hit those receivers the rare time they do get open and its right and left tackles can’t pass block.
There is no quick fix here for the Vikings. Certainly sticking Kelly Holcomb at quarterback for the apparently too-injured-to-play Tarvaris Jackson (although he was in uniform) didn’t provide much spark. Holcomb’s numbers (14 for 28, 165 yards, 0 TDs and 0 INTs) weren’t bad by Jackson’s low standards. He also looked more poised in the pocket than Jackson but, as expected, he wasn’t able to escape trouble when his offensive line failed to protect him, which was often.
Holcomb also showed the rustiness of a guy who hadn’t played a single game since 2005. In the second quarter, with the Vikings driving in Chiefs territory, the K.C. defence bit on some play action and Robert Ferguson got wide open behind the Chiefs secondary. One problem: Holcomb, who actually had time to throw, slightly overthrew Ferguson. The pass slipped harmlessly through Ferguson’s fingertips and fell to the ground and instead of being up 17-3; the Vikings were still only up 10-3. Two consecutive sacks later, the Vikings were out of field goal range and had to punt the ball away. It was a huge missed opportunity in a game where opportunities were hard to come by for the Vikings and it came back to bite them in the ass.
Overall, Holcomb’s play was uninspiring. He showed he may not be as prone to making as many ill-advised throws as the inexperienced Jackson but he’s no game breaker, either. However, he will probably get another shot against Green Bay next Sunday.
Along with Holcomb’s lukewarm play, the Vikings wide outs also deserve a fair share of the blame for yet another poor offensive performance. Peterson and Moore continue to be the team’s best receivers. Unfortunately, they are running backs by trade. Bobby Wade is decent working in the middle of the field and making a few yards after the catch but he’s best suited as your third or fourth receiver, not your number one guy. The rest of the crew are non-factors, although rookie Sidney Rice has nice hands and might be a player in another season or two. Think a guy like Plaxico Burress – whom the Vikings chose not to pursue as a replacement for Randy Moss in 2005 – could be of some service right about now?
And what would a post-game analysis of a Vikings game be without some bitching about the play of the team’s offensive line? Once again, the line, particularly in the second half, failed to give its quarterback nearly enough time to throw the ball. The Chiefs registered five sacks, numerous quarterback hurries and tipped balls and forced Holcomb to throw under duress much of the game.
Left tackle Byrant McKinnie might want to cover his eyes when the O-line breaks down the game film this week. Matched up against the Chiefs Jared Allen most of the day, Allen looked like the second coming of Deacon Jones and registered eight tackles, two sacks, a forced fumble and had two tipped passes. McKinnie also was the guy giving up the sack to Tamba Hali on the final drive that virtually sealed the win for the Chiefs. On the play, McKinnie showed why he will never be anything more than a run-of-the-mill left tackle and why the team’s management must have been smoking some wicked ganga when it signed him to a multi-million dollar contract extension last year.
Hali rushed wide off the snap, a smart move because the lumbering McKinnie couldn’t turn his hips quickly enough to cut off Hali and get his hands on him. As a result, Hali was pretty much untouched and crunched into a defenceless Holcomb shortly thereafter. It’s a sight we’ve seen far too often the past two seasons from McKinnie. He continues to set a low standard of play that the rest of the line seems to be trying to live down to.
You can also point some blame the defence’s way, if you care to. You could point to the fact the unit didn’t force enough turnovers against a lackluster Kansas City offence, couldn’t get much pressure on the mediocre Damon Huard and gave up too many big passing plays, again, in the second half. However, the defence still gave up only 13 points. And you can’t expect the defence to score a touchdown or two every game. Isn’t that the offence’s job?
The optimists will look at Sunday’s game and say the apparent blown call on Visanthe Shiancoe’s second quarter touchdown catch that was ruled incomplete cost the Vikings this game. That sort of optimism misses the point though. The fact is the Vikings offence can’t score. It is a liability just like it was much of 2006. Childress and his hand-picked lackey, Darrell Bevell, can talk all they want about seeing improvement but to borrow a phrase from a former Vikings coach, Denny Green, the Vikings offence is who we thought they were – Superbad.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Kelly's the hero?
It doesn’t look like Tarvaris Jackson will be able to play tomorrow against Kansas City. Considering how he’s played thus far, maybe that’s for the best. So who replaces Jackson tomorrow? Head coach Brad Childress isn’t saying. But it would be shocking if it wasn’t Kelly Holcomb.
Whether that’s a good thing or not, we’ll find out on Sunday. Holcomb’s a player who has had a funny NFL career. He was cast off by two teams that were in desperate need of a quarterback (Cleveland and Buffalo) and after being traded to Philadelphia this spring, couldn’t beat out A.J. Feeley – yes, THE A.J. Feeley – for the back up job with the Eagles. That’s not the kind of stuff one usually puts down to pad their resume.
However, if you look over his statistics from the games he’s played, you’ll notice Holcomb’s had flashes of competence – something we’ve yet to see from Jackson and Brooks Bollinger. Unfortunately, that Holcomb is viewed as an upgrade over anybody else the team can currently run out there tells you all you need to know about the state of the quarterback position with the Vikings. And I’m not as sold as some other people are that Holcomb is going to be a big upgrade over Jackson.
Say what you will about Jackson (and lots has been said this week) but he has been able to keep plays alive with his legs despite the best efforts of a leaky offensive line to get him killed. Holcomb isn’t nearly as mobile as Jackson. If the Vikings O-line doesn’t start significantly improving its pass blocking, Holcomb will be spending a lot of time on his back. It’s pretty hard to throw touchdowns from that position.
Two other things to watch for in this game:
Tamba Hali and Jared Allen vs. Ryan Cook and Bryant McKinnie: Allen will play tomorrow for the Chiefs after serving a two-game suspension for substance abuse. McKinnie always struggles against defensive ends that can bring it off the edge. Meanwhile, Ryan Cook generally struggles against everybody. Sunday his job is to block Tamba Hali, a second-year player who had eight sacks last year. If McKinnie and Cook hold their own against these two, the Vikings offence should look much sharper than it did against Detroit.
The Chiefs wide receivers vs. the Vikings secondary: Almost everybody is expecting the Chiefs to try to pound the ball on the ground because they have Larry Johnson, because Damon Huard has struggled and because the Chiefs wide receivers aren’t very good. But if the Chiefs do that, they will be ignoring the offensive blueprint used with great success by every NFL team that has played the Vikings since week eight of last year.
The Vikings defence struggles against the pass. If I’m Herm Edwards, even though Huard is my quarterback and Samie Parker and Dwayne Bowe are my wideouts, I’m throwing the ball a lot in this game. But if that happens and the Vikings secondary somehow wins that battle, it’s hard to see how Minnesota loses to the Chiefs - even at Arrowhead.
Burning Chilly
While I live far, far away from the fine state of Minnesota, I get the feeling Brad Childress isn’t highly thought of there. But maybe he’s not highly thought of anywhere. In a Friday post, a Kissing Suzy Kolber blogger came up with a line that I'm ready to nominate as the greatest Childress putdown of all time.
In picking the Chiefs to cover the spread against the Vikings, the KSK blogger had this to say about Childress: “Is it me or does Brad Childress look like the kind of guy that beats up cheap hookers to blow off steam?”
Now that’s a putdown.
Whether that’s a good thing or not, we’ll find out on Sunday. Holcomb’s a player who has had a funny NFL career. He was cast off by two teams that were in desperate need of a quarterback (Cleveland and Buffalo) and after being traded to Philadelphia this spring, couldn’t beat out A.J. Feeley – yes, THE A.J. Feeley – for the back up job with the Eagles. That’s not the kind of stuff one usually puts down to pad their resume.
However, if you look over his statistics from the games he’s played, you’ll notice Holcomb’s had flashes of competence – something we’ve yet to see from Jackson and Brooks Bollinger. Unfortunately, that Holcomb is viewed as an upgrade over anybody else the team can currently run out there tells you all you need to know about the state of the quarterback position with the Vikings. And I’m not as sold as some other people are that Holcomb is going to be a big upgrade over Jackson.
Say what you will about Jackson (and lots has been said this week) but he has been able to keep plays alive with his legs despite the best efforts of a leaky offensive line to get him killed. Holcomb isn’t nearly as mobile as Jackson. If the Vikings O-line doesn’t start significantly improving its pass blocking, Holcomb will be spending a lot of time on his back. It’s pretty hard to throw touchdowns from that position.
Two other things to watch for in this game:
Tamba Hali and Jared Allen vs. Ryan Cook and Bryant McKinnie: Allen will play tomorrow for the Chiefs after serving a two-game suspension for substance abuse. McKinnie always struggles against defensive ends that can bring it off the edge. Meanwhile, Ryan Cook generally struggles against everybody. Sunday his job is to block Tamba Hali, a second-year player who had eight sacks last year. If McKinnie and Cook hold their own against these two, the Vikings offence should look much sharper than it did against Detroit.
The Chiefs wide receivers vs. the Vikings secondary: Almost everybody is expecting the Chiefs to try to pound the ball on the ground because they have Larry Johnson, because Damon Huard has struggled and because the Chiefs wide receivers aren’t very good. But if the Chiefs do that, they will be ignoring the offensive blueprint used with great success by every NFL team that has played the Vikings since week eight of last year.
The Vikings defence struggles against the pass. If I’m Herm Edwards, even though Huard is my quarterback and Samie Parker and Dwayne Bowe are my wideouts, I’m throwing the ball a lot in this game. But if that happens and the Vikings secondary somehow wins that battle, it’s hard to see how Minnesota loses to the Chiefs - even at Arrowhead.
Burning Chilly
While I live far, far away from the fine state of Minnesota, I get the feeling Brad Childress isn’t highly thought of there. But maybe he’s not highly thought of anywhere. In a Friday post, a Kissing Suzy Kolber blogger came up with a line that I'm ready to nominate as the greatest Childress putdown of all time.
In picking the Chiefs to cover the spread against the Vikings, the KSK blogger had this to say about Childress: “Is it me or does Brad Childress look like the kind of guy that beats up cheap hookers to blow off steam?”
Now that’s a putdown.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
No half measures here
Among the many pressing issues Vikings head coach Brad Childress faces in the coming weeks is how he handles the playing time doled out to rookie running back and potential superstar Adrian Peterson and veteran Chester Taylor – whenever Taylor returns to action after sitting out almost two full games with a hip injury.
Last year the Vikings signed Taylor away from the Baltimore Ravens to be the team’s number one running back. It was a good signing. Taylor played hard and for the most part, played well. His 1,216 yards in 15 games was the ninth best rushing total in the NFL. In nine of the 15 games he played in, Taylor had 20 or more carries. He had 303 carries in all and also caught 42 passes for good measure. However, as much as Vikings fans had to appreciate Taylor’s toughness and productivity, Taylor was not the kind of back who could break off big plays. He had only six runs of 20 yards or more. He was not, as John Madden used to like to call Randy Moss, “a field tilter.”
Of course, the Vikings offence badly needs field tilters. That was apparent last year as the team posted some of the worst offensive statistics in the club’s 46-year history, even with Taylor’s steady play. It’s apparent again this year. Thanks to a shaky quarterback situation, a shaky offensive line and a shaky set of wide receivers and tight ends, the Vikings offence has had the indignity of being outscored by the Vikings defence in its first two games, 21-20.
But the Vikings offence does have one field tilter – Adrian Peterson. He’s got breakaway speed. He breaks tackles. He has the vision to spot small openings and hit them. He has the moves to make defenders miss. He can catch the ball out of the backfield and rarely gets stopped for negative yardage on any play. Any time Peterson has the ball in his hands, he’s a threat to score. And in Taylor’s absence, he’s shown he can carry the load and be the team’s number one back, despite concerns about his durability thanks to an injury-filled college career at Oklahoma.
So who gets the bulk of the carries when Taylor returns, perhaps as early as Sunday? Childress is on record saying that when both players are in uniform, the plan is for Taylor to be Starting Running Back 1(a) and Peterson to be Starting Running Back 1(b). Chilly says they will basically get an equal number of carries. While I like Taylor and appreciate how hard he played last season, with an offence that is devoid of playmakers, any game plan that forces Peterson to the sidelines just so Taylor can get his obligatory carries is not in the Vikings best interests. It lessens the opportunity Peterson will have to make those big plays – those game-changing plays – the Vikings offence desperately needs.
There are a couple of other solutions to this dilemma besides the half and half option Childress was leaning towards before Taylor got hurt. The first would be to start Peterson and have Taylor spell the rookie from time-to-time to keep him fresh during the long 16-game NFL season. However, Chilly likely won’t do this because such a move would almost certainly upset a valuable veteran player – a player Chilly probably is loyal to because of the year Taylor had in 2006. The other option would be for Childress to pull a page out of Sean Payton’s New Orleans playbook and use both players in the backfield at the same time. Much like Payton does with Deuce McCallister and Reggie Bush, Taylor could be used as Chilly’s primary runner and Peterson as a breakaway receiving threat out the backfield, while also getting the occasional bone thrown his way with a few carries here and there. Alas, don’t expect Childress to try this option either. That would smack of innovative thinking. Plus Childress, when he uses two backs in the backfield at all, prefers to have a battering ram fullback-type leading the way for the ball carrier. Which means that when Taylor does come back, expect both players to be time sharing the running back spot, a move that won’t make either player happy, will anger many Vikings fans and hurt the offence’s slim chance of being somewhat productive in 2007.
Announcing 101
Thanks to picking up the NFL Sunday Ticket package last week, I’m now able to watch every Vikings game in the comfort of my own living room. While it beats following the team’s games on the Internet, it comes with the odd disadvantage, like having to listen to broadcast teams like the Fox tandem of Matt Vasgersian and JC Pearson who called the Vikings-Lions game last Sunday. Normally I’m into the games enough that I can zone out bad announcing. But I wasn’t able to do that with Matt and JC.
Not only did the duo have nothing enlightening to say during the contest (Pearson’s best analysis came during the bit about Ernie Sims’s collection of exotic pets) but they blew a few calls badly. For example, Vasgersian had E.J. Henderson knocking down the pass that Roy Williams caught for Detroit’s first touchdown and didn’t correct himself until several seconds later even though the fans at Ford Field were going bonkers. He was also late realizing Dwight Smith had intercepted a J.T. O’Sullivan pass in the second half.
But the real howler came late in the fourth quarter after the game’s umpteenth turnover. At that point, Vasgersian told viewers that neither team seemed eager to win the game (true) and that it appeared the team “that makes the last mistake is the least likely to lose.” Priceless.
With the Vikings expected to be bringing up the rear in the NFC North this season, expect CBS and Fox to assign their least-skilled announcers to do Vikes games. It might be time to buy a good pair of earplugs.
On Deck: Play calling or personnel? (And I mean it this time.)
Last year the Vikings signed Taylor away from the Baltimore Ravens to be the team’s number one running back. It was a good signing. Taylor played hard and for the most part, played well. His 1,216 yards in 15 games was the ninth best rushing total in the NFL. In nine of the 15 games he played in, Taylor had 20 or more carries. He had 303 carries in all and also caught 42 passes for good measure. However, as much as Vikings fans had to appreciate Taylor’s toughness and productivity, Taylor was not the kind of back who could break off big plays. He had only six runs of 20 yards or more. He was not, as John Madden used to like to call Randy Moss, “a field tilter.”
Of course, the Vikings offence badly needs field tilters. That was apparent last year as the team posted some of the worst offensive statistics in the club’s 46-year history, even with Taylor’s steady play. It’s apparent again this year. Thanks to a shaky quarterback situation, a shaky offensive line and a shaky set of wide receivers and tight ends, the Vikings offence has had the indignity of being outscored by the Vikings defence in its first two games, 21-20.
But the Vikings offence does have one field tilter – Adrian Peterson. He’s got breakaway speed. He breaks tackles. He has the vision to spot small openings and hit them. He has the moves to make defenders miss. He can catch the ball out of the backfield and rarely gets stopped for negative yardage on any play. Any time Peterson has the ball in his hands, he’s a threat to score. And in Taylor’s absence, he’s shown he can carry the load and be the team’s number one back, despite concerns about his durability thanks to an injury-filled college career at Oklahoma.
So who gets the bulk of the carries when Taylor returns, perhaps as early as Sunday? Childress is on record saying that when both players are in uniform, the plan is for Taylor to be Starting Running Back 1(a) and Peterson to be Starting Running Back 1(b). Chilly says they will basically get an equal number of carries. While I like Taylor and appreciate how hard he played last season, with an offence that is devoid of playmakers, any game plan that forces Peterson to the sidelines just so Taylor can get his obligatory carries is not in the Vikings best interests. It lessens the opportunity Peterson will have to make those big plays – those game-changing plays – the Vikings offence desperately needs.
There are a couple of other solutions to this dilemma besides the half and half option Childress was leaning towards before Taylor got hurt. The first would be to start Peterson and have Taylor spell the rookie from time-to-time to keep him fresh during the long 16-game NFL season. However, Chilly likely won’t do this because such a move would almost certainly upset a valuable veteran player – a player Chilly probably is loyal to because of the year Taylor had in 2006. The other option would be for Childress to pull a page out of Sean Payton’s New Orleans playbook and use both players in the backfield at the same time. Much like Payton does with Deuce McCallister and Reggie Bush, Taylor could be used as Chilly’s primary runner and Peterson as a breakaway receiving threat out the backfield, while also getting the occasional bone thrown his way with a few carries here and there. Alas, don’t expect Childress to try this option either. That would smack of innovative thinking. Plus Childress, when he uses two backs in the backfield at all, prefers to have a battering ram fullback-type leading the way for the ball carrier. Which means that when Taylor does come back, expect both players to be time sharing the running back spot, a move that won’t make either player happy, will anger many Vikings fans and hurt the offence’s slim chance of being somewhat productive in 2007.
Announcing 101
Thanks to picking up the NFL Sunday Ticket package last week, I’m now able to watch every Vikings game in the comfort of my own living room. While it beats following the team’s games on the Internet, it comes with the odd disadvantage, like having to listen to broadcast teams like the Fox tandem of Matt Vasgersian and JC Pearson who called the Vikings-Lions game last Sunday. Normally I’m into the games enough that I can zone out bad announcing. But I wasn’t able to do that with Matt and JC.
Not only did the duo have nothing enlightening to say during the contest (Pearson’s best analysis came during the bit about Ernie Sims’s collection of exotic pets) but they blew a few calls badly. For example, Vasgersian had E.J. Henderson knocking down the pass that Roy Williams caught for Detroit’s first touchdown and didn’t correct himself until several seconds later even though the fans at Ford Field were going bonkers. He was also late realizing Dwight Smith had intercepted a J.T. O’Sullivan pass in the second half.
But the real howler came late in the fourth quarter after the game’s umpteenth turnover. At that point, Vasgersian told viewers that neither team seemed eager to win the game (true) and that it appeared the team “that makes the last mistake is the least likely to lose.” Priceless.
With the Vikings expected to be bringing up the rear in the NFC North this season, expect CBS and Fox to assign their least-skilled announcers to do Vikes games. It might be time to buy a good pair of earplugs.
On Deck: Play calling or personnel? (And I mean it this time.)
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Losing Ugly
Vikings apologists will say the team’s 20-17 loss to the Detroit Lions was a game they could have won if only a play here or a play there had gone its way. If Ryan Longwell’s potential game-winning 52-yard field goal hadn’t hit the left upright. If Brooks Bollinger hadn’t fumbled a routine snap at midfield in overtime that the Lions recovered. If Spencer Johnson hadn’t been flagged for a highly questionable roughing the passer penalty that kept a Lions third quarter drive alive and eventually resulted in a touchdown. If. If. If.
The truth is this was an ugly and horribly sloppy effort by the Vikings, a game they had no business winning and a performance that certainly would have got them blown out of if they had been playing a quality opponent. When Vikings head coach Brad Childress breaks down this game tomorrow with his staff he will see much that needs fixing – from the penalties (12 for 96 yards), to the poor pass protection and the putrid quarterback play. Can he and his staff fix all these sores in time for the Vikings to beat an 0-2 Kansas City Chiefs team that will be playing desperate in front of a frothy hometown crowd at Arrowhead Stadium? We know this much - he’s got his work cut out for him.
Chilly’s first order of business should be to sit down and have a long heart-to-heart with second year QB Tarvaris Jackson about ball security. While Jackson was certainly expected to struggle at times this season, the Vikings can’t afford for him to play like he did against the Lions. Assessing Jackson’s performance, where he was picked off four times, Childress said after the game: “It’s not a good formula for winning on the road.”
Actually, it’s not a good formula for winning anywhere. Chilly isn’t expecting Jackson to win many games for him, he just doesn’t want Jackson losing them. Regrettably, Jackson did all he could to lose this one for the Vikings. While he continues to struggle mightily throwing the deep ball, more troubling were the mental errors he made when forced to throw against Detroit. His fourth interception, where he was flushed out of the pocket and threw a deep ball essentially up for grabs, was just one of several questionable decisions he made. The game has to be seen as a huge step backwards for Jackson after an okay performance against Atlanta. Few football teams are good enough to overcome a four-interception night from their quarterback. The Vikings are not one of those teams. It’s back to the drawing board for Jackson and Chilly.
Of course, the decision-making might improve if Jackson had more time to throw. Although the Lions were only credited with two sacks, that stat doesn’t accurately reflect the amount of pressure Jackson and Bollinger (who came in for the injured Jackson in OT) faced against a Detroit defensive line that will never be confused for the old New York Sack Exchange.
The play of right tackle Ryan Cook (two more false start penalties, numerous whiffed blocking assignments) continues to be an eyesore. It’s also depressing to watch offensive lines like New England, Indianapolis and Philly skillfully pick up blitzes when the Vikings O-line seems to be clueless on how to deal with them. And the run blocking against the Lions wasn’t all that impressive either. There weren’t many holes for Adrian Peterson to run through. What to do about this unit? Your guess is as good as mine. But as much as everyone complains about the team’s lack of talent at the wide receiver position and Jackson’s inexperience as reasons behind the team’s offensive offence, it’s the play of the O-line that will determine if 2007 is going to look a lot like 2006 for this group.
Even the Vikings defence wasn’t completely blameless in the loss. It’s tough to pick on a unit that forced five turnovers, racked up yet another defensive touchdown and might be more of a threat to score than it’s own offence at this stage in the season. But you get the feeling, based on how the Lions moved the ball when John Kitna was quarterbacking, that this contest might not have been close if Kitna hadn’t missed half the game with a concussion and been replaced by Vikings castoff J.T. O’Sullivan. And the unit still hasn’t come up with a way to defend the opposing offence’s frequent tactic of dinking and dunking it’s way down the field.
The Vikings seem to be vastly improved at pressuring the quarterback this year. With the quarterbacks having less time to throw the ball, wouldn’t it make sense to play a little press coverage on opposing receivers from time-to-time and jam them at the line of scrimmage instead of giving away an eight-to-10 yard cushion every play?
So, was there any silver lining for the Vikings in the loss? Well, Peterson continues to be as good as advertised. While he couldn’t duplicate last week’s rushing performance against the Lions (20 carries for 66 yards), that was more the O-line’s fault than Peterson’s. The rookie has also proven to be a pleasant surprise as a receiver out of the backfield and he has such great speed, moves and acceleration that you get the sense every time he touches the ball he could do something special. He’s also a hard-nosed runner. Arm tackles are useless against him and defenders seem to bounce off him. The NFL is going to learn quickly that you need to wrap up Adrian Peterson if you’re going to take him down.
Another encouraging sight was the solid play of the special teams for the second week in a row. Punt and kick off coverage was spot on and both Troy Williamson and Aundrae Allison had kick off returns of 56 and 60 yards, respectively, that gave the offence a short field to work with and led to 10 Vikings points. Chris Kluwe also had another nice day punting. After a woeful preseason, perhaps this group won’t be a weak spot after all.
Now if only something can be done about the Vikings offence....
On Deck: Personnel or play calling?
The truth is this was an ugly and horribly sloppy effort by the Vikings, a game they had no business winning and a performance that certainly would have got them blown out of if they had been playing a quality opponent. When Vikings head coach Brad Childress breaks down this game tomorrow with his staff he will see much that needs fixing – from the penalties (12 for 96 yards), to the poor pass protection and the putrid quarterback play. Can he and his staff fix all these sores in time for the Vikings to beat an 0-2 Kansas City Chiefs team that will be playing desperate in front of a frothy hometown crowd at Arrowhead Stadium? We know this much - he’s got his work cut out for him.
Chilly’s first order of business should be to sit down and have a long heart-to-heart with second year QB Tarvaris Jackson about ball security. While Jackson was certainly expected to struggle at times this season, the Vikings can’t afford for him to play like he did against the Lions. Assessing Jackson’s performance, where he was picked off four times, Childress said after the game: “It’s not a good formula for winning on the road.”
Actually, it’s not a good formula for winning anywhere. Chilly isn’t expecting Jackson to win many games for him, he just doesn’t want Jackson losing them. Regrettably, Jackson did all he could to lose this one for the Vikings. While he continues to struggle mightily throwing the deep ball, more troubling were the mental errors he made when forced to throw against Detroit. His fourth interception, where he was flushed out of the pocket and threw a deep ball essentially up for grabs, was just one of several questionable decisions he made. The game has to be seen as a huge step backwards for Jackson after an okay performance against Atlanta. Few football teams are good enough to overcome a four-interception night from their quarterback. The Vikings are not one of those teams. It’s back to the drawing board for Jackson and Chilly.
Of course, the decision-making might improve if Jackson had more time to throw. Although the Lions were only credited with two sacks, that stat doesn’t accurately reflect the amount of pressure Jackson and Bollinger (who came in for the injured Jackson in OT) faced against a Detroit defensive line that will never be confused for the old New York Sack Exchange.
The play of right tackle Ryan Cook (two more false start penalties, numerous whiffed blocking assignments) continues to be an eyesore. It’s also depressing to watch offensive lines like New England, Indianapolis and Philly skillfully pick up blitzes when the Vikings O-line seems to be clueless on how to deal with them. And the run blocking against the Lions wasn’t all that impressive either. There weren’t many holes for Adrian Peterson to run through. What to do about this unit? Your guess is as good as mine. But as much as everyone complains about the team’s lack of talent at the wide receiver position and Jackson’s inexperience as reasons behind the team’s offensive offence, it’s the play of the O-line that will determine if 2007 is going to look a lot like 2006 for this group.
Even the Vikings defence wasn’t completely blameless in the loss. It’s tough to pick on a unit that forced five turnovers, racked up yet another defensive touchdown and might be more of a threat to score than it’s own offence at this stage in the season. But you get the feeling, based on how the Lions moved the ball when John Kitna was quarterbacking, that this contest might not have been close if Kitna hadn’t missed half the game with a concussion and been replaced by Vikings castoff J.T. O’Sullivan. And the unit still hasn’t come up with a way to defend the opposing offence’s frequent tactic of dinking and dunking it’s way down the field.
The Vikings seem to be vastly improved at pressuring the quarterback this year. With the quarterbacks having less time to throw the ball, wouldn’t it make sense to play a little press coverage on opposing receivers from time-to-time and jam them at the line of scrimmage instead of giving away an eight-to-10 yard cushion every play?
So, was there any silver lining for the Vikings in the loss? Well, Peterson continues to be as good as advertised. While he couldn’t duplicate last week’s rushing performance against the Lions (20 carries for 66 yards), that was more the O-line’s fault than Peterson’s. The rookie has also proven to be a pleasant surprise as a receiver out of the backfield and he has such great speed, moves and acceleration that you get the sense every time he touches the ball he could do something special. He’s also a hard-nosed runner. Arm tackles are useless against him and defenders seem to bounce off him. The NFL is going to learn quickly that you need to wrap up Adrian Peterson if you’re going to take him down.
Another encouraging sight was the solid play of the special teams for the second week in a row. Punt and kick off coverage was spot on and both Troy Williamson and Aundrae Allison had kick off returns of 56 and 60 yards, respectively, that gave the offence a short field to work with and led to 10 Vikings points. Chris Kluwe also had another nice day punting. After a woeful preseason, perhaps this group won’t be a weak spot after all.
Now if only something can be done about the Vikings offence....
On Deck: Personnel or play calling?
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Beautiful Losers
So…. Jon Kitna guarantees the Detroit Lions will win more than 10 games in ’07. Mike Furrey figures the Lions should win 10 to 12 games “easily.” Number one pick Calvin Johnson probably isn’t going to suck. And Detroit, the second worst team in the NFL last year, beat up on the Oakland Raiders, the worst team in the NFL last season, in its season opener. Suddenly the Lions don’t seem like the sad sacks of the league anymore and there are plenty of football writers (I won’t call them experts) like CBS Sportsline’s Clark Judge who think the Vikings could be in trouble when they play at Ford Field on Sunday.
I can’t say I’m buying into that line of thinking. Sure, I’m worried about the game. But I worry about every Vikings game. That comes with the territory if you’re a Vikings fan. However, I usually worry a little less when the Vikes play Detroit. That’s the case this weekend as well. But it has nothing to do with match ups or that I think that Adrian Peterson will have another big day or that the Williams brothers will suffocate the Lions running game.
I worry less because we own these schmucks. We’ve always owned them and we will continue to own them. The Lions players change. The results stay the same. Most Vikings fans are aware that the team has beaten the Lions 10 straight times and 16 of the past 18 times since 1998. Viking Update points out most of those games were close. The Vikings won them anyway. Even when Minnesota shouldn’t have won, it did. Sometimes you’ve got a franchises number. It’s not something that can be logically explained. The Vikings have the Lions number.
Actually, a lot of teams have had the Lions number over the years, particularly during the Matt Millen era. The team just can’t seem to get out of its own way. And check out what Kitna said a couple of months ago on a Detroit sports radio show when the hosts expressed shock (justifiably so) that Kitna predicted the Lions would win more than 10 games in 2007 after going 3-13 in 2006.
Kitna: Last year, man, it really sucked. I mean, week in and week out, to be right there to have a chance to win week in and week out. That was a hard thing for every one of us to swallow.
Kitna’s lament here is that Detroit was thisclose to being an 8-8, 9-7 or maybe even 10-6 team. According to Kitna, if a play here or there had gone the Lions way instead of the other team’s way, Detroit coulda been a contender. But that’s what losing teams do, isn’t it? They don’t close out games. They make that killer mistake at the most crucial time. They lose games they should win and then they talk about what might have been after it’s all over. The Lions have been that team when they play the Vikings for a long, long time. And while I won’t be surprised if Detroit ends the streak on Sunday – it will happen someday – I wouldn’t bet any money on it. I’m expecting the Vikings to pull this one out, bad offence and all, by a score of 23-17 or some slight variation of that total.
Heeerrrre’s Johnny!
Of course, one’s prediction can’t be completely based on curses, spells and voodoo. It just isn’t proper to make a post and not give readers a single objective reason why you're still confident the Vikings will make it 11 wins in a row against Detroit on Sunday. So, here is my reason: The Kitna Factor.
We know Mr. Kitna is capable of putting up big numbers. He did so against the Raiders (27 for 36, 289 yards, 3 TDs) last week. But he’s equally capable of making big mistakes – he was picked off twice in that Raiders game. Kitna’s done this his entire career. Playing against a Vikings defence that has been forcing plenty of turnovers since the team broke from training camp, expect that trend to continue. The blueprint for the defence will be pretty simple: Pressure Kitna and force him into bad throws. The turnovers will follow and so should a Vikings victory.
On Deck: Assessing the outcome
I can’t say I’m buying into that line of thinking. Sure, I’m worried about the game. But I worry about every Vikings game. That comes with the territory if you’re a Vikings fan. However, I usually worry a little less when the Vikes play Detroit. That’s the case this weekend as well. But it has nothing to do with match ups or that I think that Adrian Peterson will have another big day or that the Williams brothers will suffocate the Lions running game.
I worry less because we own these schmucks. We’ve always owned them and we will continue to own them. The Lions players change. The results stay the same. Most Vikings fans are aware that the team has beaten the Lions 10 straight times and 16 of the past 18 times since 1998. Viking Update points out most of those games were close. The Vikings won them anyway. Even when Minnesota shouldn’t have won, it did. Sometimes you’ve got a franchises number. It’s not something that can be logically explained. The Vikings have the Lions number.
Actually, a lot of teams have had the Lions number over the years, particularly during the Matt Millen era. The team just can’t seem to get out of its own way. And check out what Kitna said a couple of months ago on a Detroit sports radio show when the hosts expressed shock (justifiably so) that Kitna predicted the Lions would win more than 10 games in 2007 after going 3-13 in 2006.
Kitna: Last year, man, it really sucked. I mean, week in and week out, to be right there to have a chance to win week in and week out. That was a hard thing for every one of us to swallow.
Kitna’s lament here is that Detroit was thisclose to being an 8-8, 9-7 or maybe even 10-6 team. According to Kitna, if a play here or there had gone the Lions way instead of the other team’s way, Detroit coulda been a contender. But that’s what losing teams do, isn’t it? They don’t close out games. They make that killer mistake at the most crucial time. They lose games they should win and then they talk about what might have been after it’s all over. The Lions have been that team when they play the Vikings for a long, long time. And while I won’t be surprised if Detroit ends the streak on Sunday – it will happen someday – I wouldn’t bet any money on it. I’m expecting the Vikings to pull this one out, bad offence and all, by a score of 23-17 or some slight variation of that total.
Heeerrrre’s Johnny!
Of course, one’s prediction can’t be completely based on curses, spells and voodoo. It just isn’t proper to make a post and not give readers a single objective reason why you're still confident the Vikings will make it 11 wins in a row against Detroit on Sunday. So, here is my reason: The Kitna Factor.
We know Mr. Kitna is capable of putting up big numbers. He did so against the Raiders (27 for 36, 289 yards, 3 TDs) last week. But he’s equally capable of making big mistakes – he was picked off twice in that Raiders game. Kitna’s done this his entire career. Playing against a Vikings defence that has been forcing plenty of turnovers since the team broke from training camp, expect that trend to continue. The blueprint for the defence will be pretty simple: Pressure Kitna and force him into bad throws. The turnovers will follow and so should a Vikings victory.
On Deck: Assessing the outcome
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
How do you like me now?
Cue the Sports Illustrated cover story. Randy Moss – or Ole’ 84, as he often called himself in his former life as a Minnesota Viking – had a debut to remember with the New England Patriots on Sunday. His stat line of nine catches, 183 yards and one touchdown – or about a half a season’s worth of production, minus the touchdown, from Troy Williamson – was an emphatic “f**k you” from Moss to all the critics who doubted he had anything left after two mostly miserable seasons in Oakland. You could tell Ole’ 84 (who is now wearing his new “81” with the Pats) was pleased with his performance, too. He even humoured the New York media with a post-game interview after the win, something he was famous for skipping out on when he played for the Vikings.
With the local cable company here in Yellowknife inexplicably carrying Boston affiliates of the major U.S. networks – even though we’re a gazillion miles away from the U.S. Northeast here in the Great White North – I got to see a lot of Sunday’s Patriots-Jets game and a lot of Ole’ 84. He certainly didn’t look like a player in decline as he glided past three Jets defenders and hauled in Tom Brady’s 51-yard bomb in the left corner of the Jets end zone. It was the kind of play he made on a routine basis while playing for the purple and gold. It was also the kind of play that must have had Vikings fans fantasizing how Moss - even at 30 years of age - could transform an offence that has lacked punch, pizzazz, and more importantly, point production during the Brad Childress era.
What would Ole’ 84 mean to the Vikings if he hadn’t been traded to the Raiders in 2005? Unfortunately, given the current state of the Vikings offensive personnel – not much. And Sunday’s touchdown catch was a perfect example of why Moss wouldn’t thrive playing for the 2007 Minnesota Vikings the way he’s likely to thrive playing for the 2007 New England Patriots.
Let’s start with the reason Ole’ 84 was able to catch the pass in the first place: time. On the play, Brady had time to sit in the pocket, watch Moss zigzag 50 yards down the field, eat a sandwich, read a 20,000-word New Yorker article and father a second child. And Brady had that kind of time all day against the Jets. Given the fact his quarterback was untouched for six or seven seconds on that play, of course a player of Ole’ 84’s ability is going to get open.
The problem for the Vikings is, the Atlanta game notwithstanding, its offensive line, as currently constructed, has never shown an ability to afford its quarterbacks anything close to that kind of pocket security. There’s no way Tarvaris Jackson gets the kind of time Brady had on that play to wait for Ole’ 84 to get open, which means the play would have never happened. That goes for any other deep pass plays that would be called for Moss if he were wearing a Vikings jersey these days. Because the deep ball is his calling card but Jackson would rarely have the time to throw it, Ole 84’s value to the Vikings would be severely limited.
The second reason Ole’ 84 wouldn’t be very effective if he played for this version of the Minnesota Vikings is that his quarterback here would be Jackson and not the guy who threw the 51-yard touchdown pass to Moss: Tom Brady.
Brady is arguably the league’s most accurate passer and at the height of his NFL powers. He is able to make any throw required of an NFL quarterback. The same can’t be said for Jackson. While he generally looks good on short throws, he’s been woeful throwing the deep ball during his short career. That may change and with the physical ability Jackson’s been blessed with, I expect it to. But for now (and this has been pointed out in other Vikings blogs) Jackson either under throws his receivers on deep routes or overthrows them. With Jackson unable to take advantage of Ole’ 84’s big play ability as a receiver, Moss’s talents would be wasted playing in this Vikings offence.
Couple those on-field realities with the fact it’s doubtful Chilly would know what to do with a weapon like Ole’ 84 even if he had him and I don’t think Moss would have anywhere near the impact on the Vikings that he ought to. Would he be an upgrade on what the Vikings have at wide receiver right now? Absolutely. But flaws within the Vikings offence that he has no control over – the quarterback, the offensive line, the coach – would conspire against Ole’ 84 helping turn a toothless Vikings offence into a productive one.
On Deck: Lion Taming
With the local cable company here in Yellowknife inexplicably carrying Boston affiliates of the major U.S. networks – even though we’re a gazillion miles away from the U.S. Northeast here in the Great White North – I got to see a lot of Sunday’s Patriots-Jets game and a lot of Ole’ 84. He certainly didn’t look like a player in decline as he glided past three Jets defenders and hauled in Tom Brady’s 51-yard bomb in the left corner of the Jets end zone. It was the kind of play he made on a routine basis while playing for the purple and gold. It was also the kind of play that must have had Vikings fans fantasizing how Moss - even at 30 years of age - could transform an offence that has lacked punch, pizzazz, and more importantly, point production during the Brad Childress era.
What would Ole’ 84 mean to the Vikings if he hadn’t been traded to the Raiders in 2005? Unfortunately, given the current state of the Vikings offensive personnel – not much. And Sunday’s touchdown catch was a perfect example of why Moss wouldn’t thrive playing for the 2007 Minnesota Vikings the way he’s likely to thrive playing for the 2007 New England Patriots.
Let’s start with the reason Ole’ 84 was able to catch the pass in the first place: time. On the play, Brady had time to sit in the pocket, watch Moss zigzag 50 yards down the field, eat a sandwich, read a 20,000-word New Yorker article and father a second child. And Brady had that kind of time all day against the Jets. Given the fact his quarterback was untouched for six or seven seconds on that play, of course a player of Ole’ 84’s ability is going to get open.
The problem for the Vikings is, the Atlanta game notwithstanding, its offensive line, as currently constructed, has never shown an ability to afford its quarterbacks anything close to that kind of pocket security. There’s no way Tarvaris Jackson gets the kind of time Brady had on that play to wait for Ole’ 84 to get open, which means the play would have never happened. That goes for any other deep pass plays that would be called for Moss if he were wearing a Vikings jersey these days. Because the deep ball is his calling card but Jackson would rarely have the time to throw it, Ole 84’s value to the Vikings would be severely limited.
The second reason Ole’ 84 wouldn’t be very effective if he played for this version of the Minnesota Vikings is that his quarterback here would be Jackson and not the guy who threw the 51-yard touchdown pass to Moss: Tom Brady.
Brady is arguably the league’s most accurate passer and at the height of his NFL powers. He is able to make any throw required of an NFL quarterback. The same can’t be said for Jackson. While he generally looks good on short throws, he’s been woeful throwing the deep ball during his short career. That may change and with the physical ability Jackson’s been blessed with, I expect it to. But for now (and this has been pointed out in other Vikings blogs) Jackson either under throws his receivers on deep routes or overthrows them. With Jackson unable to take advantage of Ole’ 84’s big play ability as a receiver, Moss’s talents would be wasted playing in this Vikings offence.
Couple those on-field realities with the fact it’s doubtful Chilly would know what to do with a weapon like Ole’ 84 even if he had him and I don’t think Moss would have anywhere near the impact on the Vikings that he ought to. Would he be an upgrade on what the Vikings have at wide receiver right now? Absolutely. But flaws within the Vikings offence that he has no control over – the quarterback, the offensive line, the coach – would conspire against Ole’ 84 helping turn a toothless Vikings offence into a productive one.
On Deck: Lion Taming
Sunday, September 09, 2007
Yo, Adrian
While it came against the Michael Vick-less Atlanta Falcons, the 2007 version of the Minnesota Vikings emerged with an encouraging 24-3 win at home on Sunday. And they have rookie running back Adrian Peterson to thank for it. Not only did Peterson run for 103 yards in just 19 carries but his 60-yard touchdown reception with the Vikings holding a skimpy 10-3 lead midway through the fourth quarter sealed the win.
Vikings fans wondering what kind of affect their team’s prize rookie would have on an offence that was anemic in 2006 got their answer on that play, when Peterson caught a screen pass from Tarvaris Jackson, juked by a couple of Falcons defenders and then showed the kind of breakaway speed we haven’t seen from a Vikings running back since the Robert Smith days to race untouched to the end zone.
It was an impressive play and an impressive day for the former Oklahoma Sooner. It also looks like the Vikings are going to need a lot more of that kind of stellar play from Peterson. They’ll need it because Chester Taylor may be out for an extended period of time due to an apparent hip injury that forced him out the game in the first quarter. They will also need it because it’s clear the team’s passing attack has a long way to go before it reminds anyone of the Air Coryell era San Diego Chargers.
In his third NFL start, Jackson was mediocre at best. That’s not surprising considering his lack of NFL playing experience. Still, Vikings fans had to be hoping Jackson might show them more. While he spread the ball around, completing passes to nine different players, take away the screen pass to Peterson and Jackson would have barely cracked the 100-yard mark in passing. That kind of production isn’t going to get it done for the Vikings against the better teams. But barring some massive improvement from Jackson and the team’s pedestrian receiving corps, it’s hard to see how much better the Vikes passing attack is going to be this year. Too bad we still didn’t have that Moss guy. He looked pretty good today (more on this later in the week.)
However, if the Vikings defence keeps on playing like it did against Atlanta, maybe the offence won’t have to do much. Continuing a welcome preseason trend, the Vikings defence was opportunistic - returning two Joey Harrington interceptions for scores. Ahhh, the uniform may change but the results stay the same for Santa Joey when he plays the Vikings.
Particularly encouraging were the six sacks the Vikings registered. It’s no news flash that the defence did a poor job pressuring the quarterback in 2006, which was one reason why opposing quarterbacks routinely picked apart the Vikings pass defence. Rookie defensive end Brian Robison notched two sacks. Could it be the Vikings have found an actual defensive end that can rush the passer? There was even a Kenechi Udeze sighting, as the 2004 number one pick registered three tackles and his first sack in over two seasons against the Falcons. Perhaps Udeze does have a pulse.
In some ways, it’s hard to know what to make of the Vikings win over the Falcons because they were led by Harrington, who the Vikings have treated like a personal piñata since he came into the league. Atlanta is not going to be the class of the NFL. The good news is that neither are any of the Vikings next three opponents: the Detroit Lions, Kansas City Chiefs and the Green Bay Packers. With the Chiefs looking weak, Brett Favre and the Packers looking mediocre and the Lions being the Lions, the Vikes have an excellent chance of being 3-1, or maybe even 4-0, heading into their bye week. That would be a confidence-building start for a team many football experts are picking to finish last in the NFC North this year.
On Deck: Ole’ 84
Vikings fans wondering what kind of affect their team’s prize rookie would have on an offence that was anemic in 2006 got their answer on that play, when Peterson caught a screen pass from Tarvaris Jackson, juked by a couple of Falcons defenders and then showed the kind of breakaway speed we haven’t seen from a Vikings running back since the Robert Smith days to race untouched to the end zone.
It was an impressive play and an impressive day for the former Oklahoma Sooner. It also looks like the Vikings are going to need a lot more of that kind of stellar play from Peterson. They’ll need it because Chester Taylor may be out for an extended period of time due to an apparent hip injury that forced him out the game in the first quarter. They will also need it because it’s clear the team’s passing attack has a long way to go before it reminds anyone of the Air Coryell era San Diego Chargers.
In his third NFL start, Jackson was mediocre at best. That’s not surprising considering his lack of NFL playing experience. Still, Vikings fans had to be hoping Jackson might show them more. While he spread the ball around, completing passes to nine different players, take away the screen pass to Peterson and Jackson would have barely cracked the 100-yard mark in passing. That kind of production isn’t going to get it done for the Vikings against the better teams. But barring some massive improvement from Jackson and the team’s pedestrian receiving corps, it’s hard to see how much better the Vikes passing attack is going to be this year. Too bad we still didn’t have that Moss guy. He looked pretty good today (more on this later in the week.)
However, if the Vikings defence keeps on playing like it did against Atlanta, maybe the offence won’t have to do much. Continuing a welcome preseason trend, the Vikings defence was opportunistic - returning two Joey Harrington interceptions for scores. Ahhh, the uniform may change but the results stay the same for Santa Joey when he plays the Vikings.
Particularly encouraging were the six sacks the Vikings registered. It’s no news flash that the defence did a poor job pressuring the quarterback in 2006, which was one reason why opposing quarterbacks routinely picked apart the Vikings pass defence. Rookie defensive end Brian Robison notched two sacks. Could it be the Vikings have found an actual defensive end that can rush the passer? There was even a Kenechi Udeze sighting, as the 2004 number one pick registered three tackles and his first sack in over two seasons against the Falcons. Perhaps Udeze does have a pulse.
In some ways, it’s hard to know what to make of the Vikings win over the Falcons because they were led by Harrington, who the Vikings have treated like a personal piñata since he came into the league. Atlanta is not going to be the class of the NFL. The good news is that neither are any of the Vikings next three opponents: the Detroit Lions, Kansas City Chiefs and the Green Bay Packers. With the Chiefs looking weak, Brett Favre and the Packers looking mediocre and the Lions being the Lions, the Vikes have an excellent chance of being 3-1, or maybe even 4-0, heading into their bye week. That would be a confidence-building start for a team many football experts are picking to finish last in the NFC North this year.
On Deck: Ole’ 84
Friday, September 07, 2007
Kill Bill
So my favourite sportswriter, Bill Simmons, doesn’t think much of the 2007 Minnesota Vikings or Tarvaris Jackson. He’s even picking the Vikings first opponent, the Atlanta Falcons, as his sleeper team this year and contends that – gasp – Joey Harrington will at the very least be serviceable for the Falcons. Doesn’t sound like he thinks the Vikes will pull out a win this Sunday.
While I generally hold Simmons in the highest esteem, screw him on this one. He’s going to get burned sticking up for Harrington. If the Vikings defenders get so much as a hand in Harrington’s face on a consistent basis Sunday afternoon, watch Joey put the ball up for grabs and turn the ball over at some critical juncture. This game will probably be close but the Vikings will win it.
Beyond Harrington’s play, there are a couple of other factors that will determine the outcome of this game.
No turnovers for Tarvaris
I hate it when coaches or announcers talk about a starting NFL quarterback being “an effective game manager.” What that really means is the QB is suspect and can’t be counted on to win a game for you, which any NFL quarterback should be able to do.
For the second-straight year the Vikings find themselves in such a quarterback situation. The difference is unlike last year’s game manager – Brad Johnson –Tarvaris Jackson has a lot going for him physically. But mentally, ahhh, there’s the rub. This isn’t to suggest Jackson’s dumb. He’s just green. At this stage in his career, it’s not realistic to expect he will be able to make all the reads, recognitions and smart decisions that make a great athlete a great quarterback. That only comes with game experience, something Jackson has precious little of.
However, the good news is that against the Falcons, the Vikes don’t need Jackson to turn into Peyton Manning, he just can’t turn into Joey Harrington. In other words, he can’t screw it up. If Jackson plays mistake-free football, the Vikings should be okay.
While we’re on the subject of screwing up, how about the Vikings special teams? The performance of this unit was mediocre in 2006 and has ranged from bad to abominable during the preseason. Once again, the team lacks a bonafide kickoff returner. Also worrisome is that punter Chris Kluwe and placekicker Ryan Longwell have had their share of lowlights in the exhibition contests.
But it’s the team’s punt and kickoff coverage that has really stood out – and not in a good way. The latest troubling example came against the Cowboys in the preseason finale, when someone named Jerheme Urban returned a punt 95 yards for a touchdown against the Vikings. In fact, there wasn’t a preseason game where the Vikings coverage units didn’t give up at least one big return. Opponents routinely started on their own 35-yard line or better after kickoffs and punts were returned for solid gains more often than not.
For a team like the Vikings, whose margin for error in order to win games this season will be small, this won’t do. It won’t do because a shorter field for the opposing offence to work with increases the likelihood they will score. And even when opponent’s don’t score and have to punt the ball away, they will be doing so in favourable field position, increasing the chance that the Jackson 11 get the ball back on its own 10, 15 or 20-yard line. Based on what we’ve seen so far, how many 80-yard touchdown drives do you think this offence has in it per game?
A word about Big Pat
Everybody seems to be happy in Vikingsville that the team got a contract extension done with defensive tackle Pat Williams today. The three-year extension is worth $22-million with at least $9.5-million of that guaranteed. William’s is well liked by Vikings fans and reportedly well respected in the locker room. Even better, he’s given the team excellent value on the three-year, $13-million deal he signed in 2005. The Vikings were not known for being tough to run against until Big Pat came along.
Still, it’s fair to ask if the Vikings made a mistake signing a guy for that kind of money who will turn 35 next month and isn’t an every-down player. If his play tails off quickly or his massive body betrays him, the signing could backfire. While that’s always a possibility, I can’t find fault with what the Vikings did here. It’s unlikely the team would have snagged anybody of Williams’s caliber for less money, or even for more money, in free agency. The Vikings also have no one capable of replacing him on its current roster. Spencer Johnson is a nice backup and that's all. Newcomer Fred Evans is an unknown commodity with no NFL track record of success. But he was tasered by Miami Beach police this summer after an altercation with a taxi driver.
Williams, meanwhile, has been everything the Vikings hoped he would be in his first two years with the team – a space eater and disruptive force constantly getting into the opponents backfield. Given the alternatives, this was a gamble worth taking. Besides, the deal will likely be structured so Williams gets the bulk of the cash in the first year or two of the extension. That way, the Vikings won’t take a big cap hit in the third year of the deal, when Williams will be 38 and his play would be more likely to fall off enough that the team might have to release him. Hopefully, it doesn’t end that way for Big Pat and the Vikings. But even if it does and the Vikings still get another two good years out of Williams after this season, it will be money well spent.
On Deck: Unit-by-unit analysis
While I generally hold Simmons in the highest esteem, screw him on this one. He’s going to get burned sticking up for Harrington. If the Vikings defenders get so much as a hand in Harrington’s face on a consistent basis Sunday afternoon, watch Joey put the ball up for grabs and turn the ball over at some critical juncture. This game will probably be close but the Vikings will win it.
Beyond Harrington’s play, there are a couple of other factors that will determine the outcome of this game.
No turnovers for Tarvaris
I hate it when coaches or announcers talk about a starting NFL quarterback being “an effective game manager.” What that really means is the QB is suspect and can’t be counted on to win a game for you, which any NFL quarterback should be able to do.
For the second-straight year the Vikings find themselves in such a quarterback situation. The difference is unlike last year’s game manager – Brad Johnson –Tarvaris Jackson has a lot going for him physically. But mentally, ahhh, there’s the rub. This isn’t to suggest Jackson’s dumb. He’s just green. At this stage in his career, it’s not realistic to expect he will be able to make all the reads, recognitions and smart decisions that make a great athlete a great quarterback. That only comes with game experience, something Jackson has precious little of.
However, the good news is that against the Falcons, the Vikes don’t need Jackson to turn into Peyton Manning, he just can’t turn into Joey Harrington. In other words, he can’t screw it up. If Jackson plays mistake-free football, the Vikings should be okay.
While we’re on the subject of screwing up, how about the Vikings special teams? The performance of this unit was mediocre in 2006 and has ranged from bad to abominable during the preseason. Once again, the team lacks a bonafide kickoff returner. Also worrisome is that punter Chris Kluwe and placekicker Ryan Longwell have had their share of lowlights in the exhibition contests.
But it’s the team’s punt and kickoff coverage that has really stood out – and not in a good way. The latest troubling example came against the Cowboys in the preseason finale, when someone named Jerheme Urban returned a punt 95 yards for a touchdown against the Vikings. In fact, there wasn’t a preseason game where the Vikings coverage units didn’t give up at least one big return. Opponents routinely started on their own 35-yard line or better after kickoffs and punts were returned for solid gains more often than not.
For a team like the Vikings, whose margin for error in order to win games this season will be small, this won’t do. It won’t do because a shorter field for the opposing offence to work with increases the likelihood they will score. And even when opponent’s don’t score and have to punt the ball away, they will be doing so in favourable field position, increasing the chance that the Jackson 11 get the ball back on its own 10, 15 or 20-yard line. Based on what we’ve seen so far, how many 80-yard touchdown drives do you think this offence has in it per game?
A word about Big Pat
Everybody seems to be happy in Vikingsville that the team got a contract extension done with defensive tackle Pat Williams today. The three-year extension is worth $22-million with at least $9.5-million of that guaranteed. William’s is well liked by Vikings fans and reportedly well respected in the locker room. Even better, he’s given the team excellent value on the three-year, $13-million deal he signed in 2005. The Vikings were not known for being tough to run against until Big Pat came along.
Still, it’s fair to ask if the Vikings made a mistake signing a guy for that kind of money who will turn 35 next month and isn’t an every-down player. If his play tails off quickly or his massive body betrays him, the signing could backfire. While that’s always a possibility, I can’t find fault with what the Vikings did here. It’s unlikely the team would have snagged anybody of Williams’s caliber for less money, or even for more money, in free agency. The Vikings also have no one capable of replacing him on its current roster. Spencer Johnson is a nice backup and that's all. Newcomer Fred Evans is an unknown commodity with no NFL track record of success. But he was tasered by Miami Beach police this summer after an altercation with a taxi driver.
Williams, meanwhile, has been everything the Vikings hoped he would be in his first two years with the team – a space eater and disruptive force constantly getting into the opponents backfield. Given the alternatives, this was a gamble worth taking. Besides, the deal will likely be structured so Williams gets the bulk of the cash in the first year or two of the extension. That way, the Vikings won’t take a big cap hit in the third year of the deal, when Williams will be 38 and his play would be more likely to fall off enough that the team might have to release him. Hopefully, it doesn’t end that way for Big Pat and the Vikings. But even if it does and the Vikings still get another two good years out of Williams after this season, it will be money well spent.
On Deck: Unit-by-unit analysis
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Santa Claus is Coming to Town
Could the Vikings have asked for a better season opening matchup than playing at home, against a team led by Joey Harrington?
Okay, so playing the Detroit Lions – even though Harrington doesn’t play for them anymore - would be even better. But given a choice other than the Lions, most Vikings fans would pick playing any team Harrington was quarterbacking. Well, that’s whom the Vikings get on Sunday at the Metrodome, when the Atlanta Falcons roll into town. Think Chilly, Leslie Frazier and the Vikings defence are salivating at the chance of facing Harrington instead of Michael Vick, who has terrorized the Vikes in two previous meetings but won’t be seen on an NFL field anytime soon thanks to operating a canine version of Fight Club at his Atlanta digs?
Yes, a visit by Mr. Harrington to the Metrodome is akin to Santa Claus coming down the chimney for Vikings fans. He’s never won there. Hell, he’d never beaten Minnesota anywhere until he quarterbacked the Miami Dolphins to a 24-20 victory last November in Miami. The win made Harrington 1-6 in his career against Minnesota (and let’s not forget the ridiculous 14 interceptions he’s tossed the Purple’s way in that span.) And while Harrington didn’t play that bad, by his standards, that day (26 for 42, 254 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT), the truth is, the Vikings anemic offence, Chester Taylor’s case of fumblitis and Dolphins defensive end Jason Taylor had much more to do with the result than anything Harrington did that day.
Which is why, when Atlanta and Minnesota get it on this Sunday, it could be argued that Harrington – not Tarvaris Jackson, not Chester Taylor, not Adrian Peterson, and not a potentially stout defence – will be the most important factor in determining whether the Vikings beat these birds or lose to them.
The potential fly in the ointment for the Vikings is that there are signs this won’t be the old Joey Harrington we’ve come to know and love. Have you heard how well Harrington’s been playing in Vick’s absence running rookie coach Bobby Petrino’s quarterback-friendly offence? Don’t believe the hype. Harrington’s no kid anymore. He will be 29 in October. He’s entering his sixth NFL season. He’s thrown over 2,100 passes. He’s started 66 of the 69 games he’s appeared in. He’s thrown for over 12,400 yards. He’s also never come close to completing 60 per cent of his passes in any season (57.5 last year was his best percentage.) He’s only thrown more touchdowns than interceptions in a season once. His career record as a starter is 23-43.
Granted, Harrington played on some miserable Lions teams during that period and may have got thrown to the NFL wolves too early in his career. Optimists will also point out Harrington’s completion percentage has improved, albeit slightly, each of his five previous NFL season. So maybe this year, playing for a noted quarterback guru and with few expectations, Harrington’s poised to finally breakout.
However, sometimes a player is what he is, no matter what system he plays in or coach he plays for. In Harrington’s case, he’s always been skittish in the pocket. He makes poor decisions, which result in poor throws, which result in interceptions for opposing defences, which result in losses for his team. It’s been the same deal every year. It’s difficult to envision how Harrington is suddenly going to “get it” in 2007 – especially with Atlanta’s receivers, perhaps the league’s most maligned corps in the NFL last season other than the Vikings. Bottom line: If the Vikings can apply any heat at all on Harrington (unfortunately, that’s a pretty big “if”), look for more ill-advised throws that will result turnovers and many three-and-outs for an opportunistic Vikings defence.
Joey Harrington – the gift that keeps on giving.
On Deck: Some other keys to beating Atlanta
Okay, so playing the Detroit Lions – even though Harrington doesn’t play for them anymore - would be even better. But given a choice other than the Lions, most Vikings fans would pick playing any team Harrington was quarterbacking. Well, that’s whom the Vikings get on Sunday at the Metrodome, when the Atlanta Falcons roll into town. Think Chilly, Leslie Frazier and the Vikings defence are salivating at the chance of facing Harrington instead of Michael Vick, who has terrorized the Vikes in two previous meetings but won’t be seen on an NFL field anytime soon thanks to operating a canine version of Fight Club at his Atlanta digs?
Yes, a visit by Mr. Harrington to the Metrodome is akin to Santa Claus coming down the chimney for Vikings fans. He’s never won there. Hell, he’d never beaten Minnesota anywhere until he quarterbacked the Miami Dolphins to a 24-20 victory last November in Miami. The win made Harrington 1-6 in his career against Minnesota (and let’s not forget the ridiculous 14 interceptions he’s tossed the Purple’s way in that span.) And while Harrington didn’t play that bad, by his standards, that day (26 for 42, 254 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT), the truth is, the Vikings anemic offence, Chester Taylor’s case of fumblitis and Dolphins defensive end Jason Taylor had much more to do with the result than anything Harrington did that day.
Which is why, when Atlanta and Minnesota get it on this Sunday, it could be argued that Harrington – not Tarvaris Jackson, not Chester Taylor, not Adrian Peterson, and not a potentially stout defence – will be the most important factor in determining whether the Vikings beat these birds or lose to them.
The potential fly in the ointment for the Vikings is that there are signs this won’t be the old Joey Harrington we’ve come to know and love. Have you heard how well Harrington’s been playing in Vick’s absence running rookie coach Bobby Petrino’s quarterback-friendly offence? Don’t believe the hype. Harrington’s no kid anymore. He will be 29 in October. He’s entering his sixth NFL season. He’s thrown over 2,100 passes. He’s started 66 of the 69 games he’s appeared in. He’s thrown for over 12,400 yards. He’s also never come close to completing 60 per cent of his passes in any season (57.5 last year was his best percentage.) He’s only thrown more touchdowns than interceptions in a season once. His career record as a starter is 23-43.
Granted, Harrington played on some miserable Lions teams during that period and may have got thrown to the NFL wolves too early in his career. Optimists will also point out Harrington’s completion percentage has improved, albeit slightly, each of his five previous NFL season. So maybe this year, playing for a noted quarterback guru and with few expectations, Harrington’s poised to finally breakout.
However, sometimes a player is what he is, no matter what system he plays in or coach he plays for. In Harrington’s case, he’s always been skittish in the pocket. He makes poor decisions, which result in poor throws, which result in interceptions for opposing defences, which result in losses for his team. It’s been the same deal every year. It’s difficult to envision how Harrington is suddenly going to “get it” in 2007 – especially with Atlanta’s receivers, perhaps the league’s most maligned corps in the NFL last season other than the Vikings. Bottom line: If the Vikings can apply any heat at all on Harrington (unfortunately, that’s a pretty big “if”), look for more ill-advised throws that will result turnovers and many three-and-outs for an opportunistic Vikings defence.
Joey Harrington – the gift that keeps on giving.
On Deck: Some other keys to beating Atlanta
Saturday, September 01, 2007
The Wrong Guys For the Right Side
Heading into the 2006 season most NFL analysts viewed the Vikings offensive line as a position of strength. Thanks to the free agent signing of guard Steve Hutchinson, the line featured two Pro Bowlers – Hutch and centre Matt Birk – and one player seemingly heading that way, left tackle Bryant McKinnie.
Not much attention was paid to who was going to play right guard or right tackle though. Marcus Johnson was anointed the starting right tackle and after a disappointing rookie season the coaching staff was expecting him to step it up in year two. The talent was there, he was a highly thought of second round pick - by the Vikings brass, at least. As for right guard, Artis Hicks had come over in a draft day trade with the Philadelphia Eagles. Most of us didn’t know much about Hicks. But he had to be good – hadn’t he started 14 games at left guard for an Eagles team that went to the Super Bowl?
But amid the wreckage that was the Vikings 6-10 season in 2006, it was clear one of the key culprits was the play of the offensive line. Its pass blocking was often atrocious and its run blocking left something to be desired as well, even though Chester Taylor managed to run for 1,214 yards.
While Chilly, the players and even some football writers chalked up some of the O-line’s 2006 woes to the player’s unfamiliarity with the zone blocking scheme the new coaching regime had installed, that wasn’t the sole reason, or even the primary reason, for its poor play. The bigger issue was that the Vikings didn’t have the right personnel on the right side of the line. Johnson played 10 games, before being pulled in favour of Mike Rosenthal, who was pulled in favour of rookie Ryan Cook. Hicks arguably played worse than Johnson but somehow managed to keep his starting job. The right side of the Vikings O-line was a mess.
And it’s still a mess today. The team didn’t draft an offensive lineman in the draft despite the obvious need to find upgrades for Cook, Johnson and Hicks. It also didn’t bring in any free agents to take over or even push the incumbents. So, this preseason the incumbents have been battling it out for the starting jobs once more. At right tackle, it’s Cook vs. Johnson. At right guard it’s Hicks vs. Anthony Herrera, an undrafted free agent who showed promise in 2005 before becoming persona non-gratta with the new coaching staff in 2006.
As of this writing, Childress still hasn’t revealed who won the competition and will be starting at right guard and tackle against Atlanta on Sept. 9. My guess is it will be Cook and Hicks. Gentleman, start your false starts!
However, it doesn’t really matter who starts. Barring miraculous improvement by all four players, the Vikings right side is still bad. Cook was unimpressive as a rookie and hasn’t looked any better this preseason and Johnson hasn’t been able to capitalize on the opportunity. That’s not encouraging. And if Herrera can’t beat out Hicks by now, maybe his promising play in 2005 was a mirage. Whatever happens, it looks like right side of the Vikings offensive line won’t be able to pull its weight again. That means Vikings quarterbacks will rushing passes and taking sacks amid a collapsing pocket and running plays will go primarily to the left side, making this an easy offense to scheme against.
Cruel cuts
A few comments about the Vikings final round of cuts that were made on Saturday. A couple surprises among the 22 cuts were safety Greg Blue and cornerback Dovonte Edwards. Blue is a big hitter whose weakness is his coverage ability. I guess that’s what cost him a roster spot with the Vikings, although Blue looked okay when he played this preseason. He certainly showed more than Tank Williams, who wasn’t cut despite hardly playing at all this preseason. But Williams might not be a Viking much longer either. There are reports that the team might sign former Jacksonville safety Nick Sorenson to beef up its woeful special teams. Whatever. I think Chilly’s going to regret cutting Blue.
Perhaps not as much as the decision to cut Edwards in favour of (gag) Ronyell Whitaker though. Vikings fans no doubt remember Whitaker’s 2006 play not-so-fondly, where he was often seen trailing three yards behind the slot receiver he was supposed to be covering. We can only hope Whitaker’s inclusion on the roster doesn’t mean he’s slated to be the Vikes dime back. He failed miserably in that role in 2006 and while Chilly suffers a bit from Sixth Sense syndrome (he only sees what he wants to see), its got to be apparent at this point that Charles Gordon is a better option than Whitaker.
I think Edwards would have been better than Gordon or Whitaker. Edwards missed all of 2006 with a broken arm. But in his rookie season in 2005 he showed a knack for jumping routes and breaking up passes or intercepting them without falling too often for the opposing receiver’s double moves. Don’t cry for Edwards though. Some other team will pick him up and make use of him. Too bad that team won’t be the Vikings.
On Deck: Our pal, Joey Harrington
Not much attention was paid to who was going to play right guard or right tackle though. Marcus Johnson was anointed the starting right tackle and after a disappointing rookie season the coaching staff was expecting him to step it up in year two. The talent was there, he was a highly thought of second round pick - by the Vikings brass, at least. As for right guard, Artis Hicks had come over in a draft day trade with the Philadelphia Eagles. Most of us didn’t know much about Hicks. But he had to be good – hadn’t he started 14 games at left guard for an Eagles team that went to the Super Bowl?
But amid the wreckage that was the Vikings 6-10 season in 2006, it was clear one of the key culprits was the play of the offensive line. Its pass blocking was often atrocious and its run blocking left something to be desired as well, even though Chester Taylor managed to run for 1,214 yards.
While Chilly, the players and even some football writers chalked up some of the O-line’s 2006 woes to the player’s unfamiliarity with the zone blocking scheme the new coaching regime had installed, that wasn’t the sole reason, or even the primary reason, for its poor play. The bigger issue was that the Vikings didn’t have the right personnel on the right side of the line. Johnson played 10 games, before being pulled in favour of Mike Rosenthal, who was pulled in favour of rookie Ryan Cook. Hicks arguably played worse than Johnson but somehow managed to keep his starting job. The right side of the Vikings O-line was a mess.
And it’s still a mess today. The team didn’t draft an offensive lineman in the draft despite the obvious need to find upgrades for Cook, Johnson and Hicks. It also didn’t bring in any free agents to take over or even push the incumbents. So, this preseason the incumbents have been battling it out for the starting jobs once more. At right tackle, it’s Cook vs. Johnson. At right guard it’s Hicks vs. Anthony Herrera, an undrafted free agent who showed promise in 2005 before becoming persona non-gratta with the new coaching staff in 2006.
As of this writing, Childress still hasn’t revealed who won the competition and will be starting at right guard and tackle against Atlanta on Sept. 9. My guess is it will be Cook and Hicks. Gentleman, start your false starts!
However, it doesn’t really matter who starts. Barring miraculous improvement by all four players, the Vikings right side is still bad. Cook was unimpressive as a rookie and hasn’t looked any better this preseason and Johnson hasn’t been able to capitalize on the opportunity. That’s not encouraging. And if Herrera can’t beat out Hicks by now, maybe his promising play in 2005 was a mirage. Whatever happens, it looks like right side of the Vikings offensive line won’t be able to pull its weight again. That means Vikings quarterbacks will rushing passes and taking sacks amid a collapsing pocket and running plays will go primarily to the left side, making this an easy offense to scheme against.
Cruel cuts
A few comments about the Vikings final round of cuts that were made on Saturday. A couple surprises among the 22 cuts were safety Greg Blue and cornerback Dovonte Edwards. Blue is a big hitter whose weakness is his coverage ability. I guess that’s what cost him a roster spot with the Vikings, although Blue looked okay when he played this preseason. He certainly showed more than Tank Williams, who wasn’t cut despite hardly playing at all this preseason. But Williams might not be a Viking much longer either. There are reports that the team might sign former Jacksonville safety Nick Sorenson to beef up its woeful special teams. Whatever. I think Chilly’s going to regret cutting Blue.
Perhaps not as much as the decision to cut Edwards in favour of (gag) Ronyell Whitaker though. Vikings fans no doubt remember Whitaker’s 2006 play not-so-fondly, where he was often seen trailing three yards behind the slot receiver he was supposed to be covering. We can only hope Whitaker’s inclusion on the roster doesn’t mean he’s slated to be the Vikes dime back. He failed miserably in that role in 2006 and while Chilly suffers a bit from Sixth Sense syndrome (he only sees what he wants to see), its got to be apparent at this point that Charles Gordon is a better option than Whitaker.
I think Edwards would have been better than Gordon or Whitaker. Edwards missed all of 2006 with a broken arm. But in his rookie season in 2005 he showed a knack for jumping routes and breaking up passes or intercepting them without falling too often for the opposing receiver’s double moves. Don’t cry for Edwards though. Some other team will pick him up and make use of him. Too bad that team won’t be the Vikings.
On Deck: Our pal, Joey Harrington
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
