The National Football Post's Mike Lomardi writes about his concerns with Brett Favre and the Vikings passing game.
It makes for interesting reading (the reader comments are good fun, too.) But Lombardi isn't telling Viking fans anything they hadn't already noticed after watching Favre play.
So here is what concerns me after watching Favre in two regular season games as a Viking and what amounted to roughly three quarters in the preseason.
1. Favre is slow in the pocket
This is to be expected. He'll be 40 soon and there are a lot of big, fast dudes chasing him. Still, the fact is Favre is unable to nimbly step up or around collapsing pass protection. And when an opposing pass rusher does lay a hand on him, he is going down easily, without a fight.
This isn't going to change or improve, which means the pass routes the Vikings call will have to mask this weakness throughout the season. In short: I think we are going to continue to see a lot of short passing plays. This is what the Vikings must do with the 2009 Brett Favre.
2. Favre's deep ball does not look good
He hasn't thrown many, but the ones he has thrown have lacked the zip we're seeing on most of the short throws (like the pass to Visanthe Shiancoe for a touchdown against Detroit.) It also seems like he's not steeping into his longer throws, which reduces the zip he can put into them. But that just illustrates one final problem with the Vikings passing game ....
3. The offensive line isn't protecting him very well
A big reason Favre can't step into his long throws is defenders are in the process of hammering him just as he's releasing the ball. If the Vikings blockers were doing a better job keeping pass rushers off of Favre, he'd have more time and a cleaner pocket to throw from. But he's not getting that, so the Vikings are forced to throw a lot of short stuff, featuring three-step drops and the ball coming out before a pass rusher has any hope of reaching Favre.
Again, if the pass blocking does not improve greatly, the Vikings will have to continue to call plays to hide that weakness. That's going to mean more short passing plays.
One other thing, while it's only based on two games, the Vikings are on pace to give up 56 sacks this season. Favre will not make it through the season taking that kind of punishment.
So I think the short passing game is the way it's going to be in 2009. I don't think it's going to change very much – barring significant improvements in points #2 and #3 – and the Vikings are going to have to ride this offensive formula as far as it will take them.
Considering how well Adrian Peterson has played thus far, that could be pretty far (especially if the run defence returns to its dominant old self.) But like Lombardi points out, can the Vikings beat Baltimore or Pittsburgh – the really, really good teams – this way?
I really don't know. I hope so. But I don't know.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Pass protection should get better as the season wears on. After the Packers game, Sullivan and Loadholt with have both doubled their pro starting experience from this point. That should help Herrera, as well. His job has been a lot tougher so far this year than it was last year.
That said, I'd like to see Kleinsasser and/or Chester Taylor on the line or in the backfield more during passing downs. The Packers were trying 6 and 7 man protection schemes during a majority of passing plays against the Bengals last week (unsuccessfully, but it shows it can be done), and I think Minnesota could help out Favre with similar calls.
I don't know if I've given this particular rant here yet or not, so please skip it if it sounds familiar. It looks like the Vikings are creating game film with the idea that future opponents are watching. Passes to Kleinsasser won't defeat the Browns or Lions, but they will help ol' Jimmy to be a threat to defenses instead of an obvious pass blocker. The fake fake (not a typo) midfield punt with Tarvaris Jackson in as an upback is another example of something that should give future opponents pause. I hope this is the case. It's a little risky to insert plays that are more about the future than the game at hand, but I think I like it. If I'm not simply imagining it, that is.
I don't know if Favre's deep ball will get better. I doubt he's simply forgetting to step into his throws (mechanics ought to be automatic after such a long career), and I don't think anything is stiff and sore from a lazy offseason. I think the majority of successful long throws will be a direct result of a mistake made by the opposing defense.
As long as it's working, I say dink, dunk, and let your run blocking line maul opponents while AP creates highlight after highlight. That's enough to take the division. THEN worry about the playoffs.
Peter:
In 2007 and 2008 the Vikings used Kleinsasser all the time as an extra blocker on passing downs. And Taylor was very good at chipping blockers before heading out for screens. I don't see why they wouldn't keep doing it now. But you seem to be watching the offensive line very closely so far, so maybe they are not.
And about the Vikes creating game film for future opponents – can you really afford to do that during a game? I dunno, I never played football.
I mostly notice the offensive line during a reply when I suspect the line did something bad, so I'm not a fair or impartial judge. I think they've left Kleinsasser off sometimes in order to get another weapon on the field, and I know I saw at least one play where Taylor let a guy get to Favre untouched (perhaps that was the call and Favre didn't know Taylor was the release valve, I'm nore sure).
"And about the Vikes creating game film for future opponents – can you really afford to do that during a game?"
Usually? No. Against the Browns and Lions? Maybe. It's usually not good habit to come out slow, be down at halftime, and try imposing your will in quarter 3, but that's working so far.
Also, the plays that are creating film for future opponents (which, again, is a complete hypothetical I've dreamed up) could be done in such a way that it's win-win. The fake-fake punt could set something up down the road, but it also increased the liklihood of a fair catch. Passes to Kleinsasser might not be high percentage plays, but if they come on 2nd down and 2 or 1st and 5 then there's little risk.
Just thinking out loud, here. Anxious for more games to look back on and analyze, I'm likely overanalyzing what we already have.
I was out of town over the weekend, and I just got done watching the game on DVR.
I somewhat agree with Peter's assessment on game film - it is mentioned a lot by media / players that teams hold back some of their best stuff until their big games of the year. Some years that is a luxury you cannot afford if you have a tough early schedule, but it's probably happening with the Vikings now. We will see some new plays and formations when we play the Packers - you can count on that.
Loadholt had a bad game on Sunday... very Ryan Cook-esque. Hopefully he can pull it together as the season goes on.
I think Favre still looks a lot better than Frerotte (I'm so happy I never have to mention that name in present tense) or Jackson. We haven't seen the heave off of the back foot, playground 500 ball that's been patented by Jackson in the past. He's playing really good football, and let's face it, he really hasn't had to go deep. He's made mostly all of the throws he's had to make, and he hasn't been sloppy. The quintessential "game manager," which we've been looking for all along, right?
On a side note, I thought EJ Henderson looked terrible out there on Sunday. He didn't do shit besides missing open tackles, most notably the 4th and 1 early in the game.
The team is playing well, but does not inspire confidence as a Super Bowl contender. We just don't have that dominant, killer instinct right now. It's only week three, though... so I'll see how the team fares as time goes on. So far, it's as good as we really could have hoped for.
Post a Comment