Viking stud n dud

[HardRightEdge]

who hasn't seen issues with the Packers D this year? Anybody, anybody? Thanks for the news flash.

Just like if MN doesn't win turnover battle and have superb special teams play they usually don't win, the packers rely on their offense to carry the load and hope the defense can do just enough. Every team has a strength and weakness.

Our defense does need to play better than they did during that abysmal stretch. And if they play just a bit better and our offense plays like they can, there isn't a team that should feel safe. There are a lot of "ifs". Just like there are for every team this year.

In man D, the Packers have been vulnerable on the perimeter. In zone, that soft underbelly has been vulnerable.

For what it's worth, the underbelly looked a bit firmer against the Vikes. There were defenders within striking distance of the target with greater regularity than earlier in the season. They did a good job (mostly Hyde) on Diggs, though that taketh away seemed to be at the expense of the giveth to Thielen.

Whatever glimmers of improvement we might have seen since the defensive tailspin set off by that Dallas 97 yd. drive in 33 seconds at the end of the first half, this is not a championship defense. Now, if they can win the turnover margin by +2 game after game, they could stage a run. I would think that scenario would be unprecedented. I'd like to think stranger things have happened, but I'm not sure they have.

 

[Robert Mason]

It seemed to me the Packers rushing game against the Vikings was somewhat lame for whatever reason. Only 40 yards on 15 attempts.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

It seemed to me the Packers rushing game against the Vikings was somewhat lame for whatever reason. Only 40 yards on 15 attempts.

The running game was flat out terrible against the Vikings. Fortunately the passing offense was on top of its game.

 

[Sky King]

The running game was flat out terrible against the Vikings. Fortunately the passing offense was on top of its game.

Part of that was due to the Vikes respecting the run game and not leaning heavily towards coverage. They picked their poison and it showed.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The running game was flat out terrible against the Vikings. Fortunately the passing offense was on top of its game.

Considering the optimism surrounding Montgomery's running ability along with the fact that the Vikings run defense is ranked middle of the pack, it was the one low light of the day for the offense. Detroits run defense is ranked higher than the Vikings but given that the game will be indoors, I hope to see better results on Sunday.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Part of that was due to the Vikes respecting the run game and not leaning heavily towards coverage. They picked their poison and it showed.

Agreed, the secondary deciding what they wanted to do, instead of listening to the coaches in the first half, helped as well. I still need to read more about that, but how does that happen beyond 1 or 2 plays before one of the coaches calls a timeout or at minimum while the Viking offense is on the field, get into some grills?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Agreed, the secondary deciding what they wanted to do, instead of listening to the coaches in the first half, helped as well. I still need to read more about that, but how does that happen beyond 1 or 2 plays before one of the coaches calls a timeout or at minimum while the Viking offense is on the field, get into some grills?

According to several sources the Vikings defensive backs played their own defense on Nelson through the first play of the third series then switched.

 

[Sky King]

Agreed, the secondary deciding what they wanted to do, instead of listening to the coaches in the first half, helped as well. I still need to read more about that, but how does that happen beyond 1 or 2 plays before one of the coaches calls a timeout or at minimum while the Viking offense is on the field, get into some grills?

I read earlier today (sorry, I don't remember which publication) that they went rogue for only the first series. That makes more sense than for an entire half. If so, then it got corrected quickly. Still, that's not a good sign that they did it in the first place. Very troublesome.

 

[HardRightEdge]

It seemed to me the Packers rushing game against the Vikings was somewhat lame for whatever reason. Only 40 yards on 15 attempts.

As I observed last week, Montgomery ceased to be any secret and the "88" was not going to be fooling anybody anymore.

Kendricks, the guy the Packers should have drafted instead of Randall (which is not 20/20 hindsight, by the way), played an outstanding game. That had something to do with it. I would have my doubts about the ability to run against Sean Lee if a rematch comes to pass.

 

[Robert Mason]

According to several sources the Vikings defensive backs played their own defense on Nelson through the first play of the third series then switched.

I didn't see Rhodes on Jordy until very late in the first half.

 

[HardRightEdge]

According to several sources the Vikings defensive backs played their own defense on Nelson through the first play of the third series then switched.

Yeah, that was courtesy of a Xavier Rhodes quote. He denied it later despite already being on the record. The denial lacks credibility:

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/xavier-rhodes-denies-going-against-mike-zimmer-s-game-plan-122516

 

[Robert Mason]

Stud.....The guy proposing to his girlfriend. I wonder if they will ever find out they were on camera ?

Dud....Throwing a two yard pass on 3rd and 10.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Kendricks, the guy the Packers should have drafted instead of Randall (which is not 20/20 hindsight, by the way), played an outstanding game.

Kendricks has really looked good when I have watched the Vikings. He would have been a great addition to the Packers for sure, oh well, I'm sure there were worst players we could have ended up with than Randall.

 

[Robert Mason]

Yeah, that was courtesy of a Xavier Rhodes quote. He denied it later despite already being on the record. The denial lacks credibility:

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/xavier-rhodes-denies-going-against-mike-zimmer-s-game-plan-122516

They can always go back to the game films and determine exactly what was going on here.

 

[HardRightEdge]

They can always go back to the game films and determine exactly what was going on here.

Zimmer already knows.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

They can always go back to the game films and determine exactly what was going on here.

Nick Shook, an NFL media digital content producer and Around The NFL writer analyzed the video and confirmed what I posted above. In the first half Nelson was targeted once with Rhodes in coverage making a 14-yard reception while catching all six balls for 131 yards and two touchdowns against other defensive backs.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I'm sure there were worst players we could have ended up with than Randall.

There's always that.

I'll tell what I think is the problem. He reads the QB's eyes right through the receiver's break and gets left trailing. He's a safety by college training, and reading the QBs eyes through the throw is a single high safety's stock in trade. Watch him some time; you frequently see his head cocked toward the QB post-snap.

If you watch the best cover corners playing man up, they'll be looking at the QB and the formation pre-snap for a tell, but once the receiver comes off the line their eyes are on him. Zone might be different...if you know you've got backside help you might take a shot at jumping the route off a QB read. But that requires an advanced degree in cornerbacking (e.g, Woodson), not something Randall should be messing with.

 

[Carl]

Stud.....The guy proposing to his girlfriend. I wonder if they will ever find out they were on camera ?

Dud....Throwing a two yard pass on 3rd and 10.

Based on where the Packers were on that third down (long FG range/go for it on 4th) my guess is they were trying to pick up 4-5 yards to set up a manageable 4th down play.

Unfortunately, it was very poorly executed.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Have to wonder what would have happened had the Viking secondary followed the coach's game plan. In the second half the Packers passing game was much less effective.

 

[Robert Mason]

Based on where the Packers were on that third down (long FG range/go for it on 4th) my guess is they were trying to pick up 4-5 yards to set up a manageable 4th down play.

Unfortunately, it was very poorly executed.

It was the first drive of the game, ball on the Vikings 41, two yard pass to Cook resulting in a touch back punt netting 19 yards.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Stud.....The guy proposing to his girlfriend. I wonder if they will ever find out they were on camera ?

I wonder how many time after the fact the girl says, "What did you expect me to say? We were on television, for gosh sakes." If she said "no" in Philly they'd pelt her with beer cups and snowballs.

 

[JK64]

As I observed last week, Montgomery ceased to be any secret and the "88" was not going to be fooling anybody anymore.

Kendricks, the guy the Packers should have drafted instead of Randall (which is not 20/20 hindsight, by the way), played an outstanding game. That had something to do with it. I would have my doubts about the ability to run against Sean Lee if a rematch comes to pass.

It looked to me that the Vikings' plan was not to let Montgomery or the run game beat them. So, they got Rodgers and Nelson instead. haha

 

[Deleted member 6794]

It was the first drive of the game, ball on the Vikings 41, two yard pass to Cook resulting in a touch back punt netting 19 yards.

I agree that wasn't a good call although it's possible they would have been fine gaining several yards to maybe kick a field goal. Hunter made a great play though.

 

[HardRightEdge]

It looked to me that the Vikings' plan was not to let Montgomery or the run game beat them. So, they got Rodgers and Nelson instead. haha

Well, that's the advantage of having more than one way to win instead of the "downfield first" approach of the earlier games this season and at other times in the past.

The turnaround started in the second half of the Dallas game when the Packers went to an uncharacteristic ball control passing game and followed up on that in the succeeding weeks. It may not have been evident immediately, but they've been building off that since. Demonstrating a running threat opens the short passing game which opens the long passing game. Or flip the script...demonstrating a short passing game opens the run if the defense cares to adjust.

If you're in a position and of a mind set to take what the defense gives you instead forcing the ball down the field, you can move the ball and score with regularity while setting up the selective deep throw.

While Montgomery is no Bell or Sanders or [fill in the blank], he needs to be accounted for, and if he is, something else can open up.

While you don't necessarily need a balanced offense in the sense of "we're going to run the ball 25 times", you could if they give it to you. The point being, you don't need a balanced offense in every game but you can go a long way with "balanced threats".

 

[JK64]

If you're in a position and of a mind set to take what the defense gives you instead forcing the ball down the field, you can move the ball and score with regularity while setting up the selective deep throw.

To me, this has been the key to the Packers' recent success. The short passing game/west coast offense should be a no brainer with the accurate QB we have. Chucking down the field and punting was a disaster this year.