Talk Vikes and Other MN Sports Talk Vikes and Other MN Sports

Forums  Register  Login  My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums 

Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ  Ticket List  Log Out

RE: General Vikes Talk

 
Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> Vikes Talk >> RE: General Vikes Talk Page: <<   < prev  71 72 [73] 74 75   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/13/2021 2:16:58 PM   
Bill Johanesen


Posts: 28612
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

This year Cousins' cap hit is on par with Mahommes, Dak, and Josh Allen... combined! But for those that want to crown 'em, then crown his ass


The standard comeback to that is that it's not Kirk's fault they offered him that money and any one of us would have taken it. That may be true but I'd also never throw the ball out the beck of the endzone on fourth down.



Risk? Never heard of it.

Change the play? Unheard of.

Pressure? Fold like a cheap suit.

QBR? I'm all ears!
Post #: 1801
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/13/2021 2:21:45 PM   
David F.


Posts: 10864
Joined: 12/31/2007
Status: offline
I might as well pile on a little. Going back to week 1 at Cincinnati. This was a shining example of great QB stats with poor QB play.

FOX Sports on-field reporter Jen Hale appeared during halftime of the season-opening broadcast and said Zimmer told her “many” of the first half problems on offense are on “Kirk Cousins holding onto the ball too long,”

The offense scored on three possessions in the second half to force overtime. Cousins completed 36 of 49 pass attempts for 351 yards, two touchdowns and zero interceptions. He was sacked three times total — twice during the first half.

https://heavy.com/sports/minnesota-vikings/mike-zimmer-kirk-cousins-bengals-nfl/

In the second half Kirk took a sack on a third down in the fourth quarter. He saw and identified the blitz. He proceeded to run the same play anyway, payed no attention to the pressure, and took a sack not having moved even an inch off 'his spot'. We NEEDED to at least attempt a pass to continue the drive. He just sat back there like DERP DERP I'll just run the play they called. I pointed out the blitz so even though I know my line is shit surely they'll pick up the blitz DERP DERP.

_____________________________

I wouldn't give ANY qb $30-50+ mil unless that QB had won me a Super Bowl. Did you win a Super Bowl on your rookie deal? Yes? Great! Here's your hugenormous contract. F it let's just run victory laps and love life. No? Good luck. Next!
Post #: 1802
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/13/2021 2:54:37 PM   
David F.


Posts: 10864
Joined: 12/31/2007
Status: offline
Here's the highlights from week 1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqkdUIOmxNc

At 3:38 there's a near unforgivable check down
At 8:44 our terrible defense sacks Burrows to force a fourth down from deep in their territory and have given up just 24 points in the middle of the fourth quarter
At 8:58 is the play I talked about earlier. Dude just stands there and takes a sack from pressure he pointed out just seconds earlier.
At 9:34 our terrible defense stops Cincinnati again giving us another chance

From there we use our 1:48 to hit a mix of check downs and one nice pass up the middle to Conklin to get just into field goal range. Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking? Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking or CHANGING THE PLAY when the blitzer was coming and we didn't have the numbers to stop him? Probably.

Also you'll notice that Breeland was ass for the entire game as well.

_____________________________

I wouldn't give ANY qb $30-50+ mil unless that QB had won me a Super Bowl. Did you win a Super Bowl on your rookie deal? Yes? Great! Here's your hugenormous contract. F it let's just run victory laps and love life. No? Good luck. Next!
Post #: 1803
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/13/2021 3:09:44 PM   
Murph


Posts: 2027
Joined: 4/20/2008
From: PNW
Status: offline
We have some really nice pieces if we clean house and retool wisely.

Keep the young studs and get rid of the bloat of contracts based on PAST performance.

_____________

At QB, my preferred approach would be something like:

1) Trading Cousins for a 2nd, then,

2) Signing a veteran QB like Fitzpatrick or Minshew on a cheap contract so you can fortify yourself in the trenches, then

3) Draft a QB somewhere in round 1, then,

4) Let rookie, vet and Mond battle it out in camp, then,

5) If that doesn't work, rinse and repeat annually until problem solved.

_____________________________

Hey Wilf's, let's build a "Perennial Super Bowl contender" not a "perennial playoff contender".
Post #: 1804
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/13/2021 5:59:08 PM   
marty


Posts: 13049
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline
Check out the list of Pats def coordinators that have left to become head coaches.
Not a glowing list.


If they have all been bums, then to me, it's a better chance someone hits on one of them.

It's like a team that has struck out 3 times in a row with a top 10 pick at QB or WR. They should try a 4th time, they'll probably hit a good one.

_____________________________

SKOL to the BOWL !!!
Post #: 1805
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/13/2021 6:03:32 PM   
marty


Posts: 13049
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline
Having said that, the more I look into it, I am starting to think Doug Pederson might be the best choice for next year's Vikings' HC.

_____________________________

SKOL to the BOWL !!!
Post #: 1806
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/13/2021 6:07:06 PM   
David Levine


Posts: 77940
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

Check out the list of Pats def coordinators that have left to become head coaches.
Not a glowing list.


If they have all been bums, then to me, it's a better chance someone hits on one of them.

It's like a team that has struck out 3 times in a row with a top 10 pick at QB or WR. They should try a 4th time, they'll probably hit a good one.


The Patriots don’t have an official coach at the defensive coordinator position. Instead, the role will be operated by committee, including Belichick’s two sons, Steve (OLB coach) and Brian (safeties coach).
Post #: 1807
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/13/2021 6:38:37 PM   
Daniel Lee Young

 

Posts: 14012
Status: offline
Win all 4, we get in..

Go 3-1, we might get in

Go 2-2, we need epic collapse by multiple teams for a “ chance”.

Rams and Packers and bears, oh my…

_____________________________

**** you all.
Post #: 1808
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/13/2021 7:47:18 PM   
Ricky J


Posts: 18357
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes


Yes, for those holding onto optimism / a chance for the playoffs ... its got to be tough.



Nah, but it takes a little work to get off that natural negative train most humans seem comfortable living with ...
Post #: 1809
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/13/2021 8:34:19 PM   
bohumm

 

Posts: 5705
Joined: 10/28/2007
From: Altadena, CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

Here's the highlights from week 1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqkdUIOmxNc

At 3:38 there's a near unforgivable check down
At 8:44 our terrible defense sacks Burrows to force a fourth down from deep in their territory and have given up just 24 points in the middle of the fourth quarter
At 8:58 is the play I talked about earlier. Dude just stands there and takes a sack from pressure he pointed out just seconds earlier.
At 9:34 our terrible defense stops Cincinnati again giving us another chance

From there we use our 1:48 to hit a mix of check downs and one nice pass up the middle to Conklin to get just into field goal range. Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking? Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking or CHANGING THE PLAY when the blitzer was coming and we didn't have the numbers to stop him? Probably.

Also you'll notice that Breeland was ass for the entire game as well.

Kirk has no forward lean, stipulated. Risk averse, check. Poor pocket presence, ya buddy. That said:

On the "near unforgivable check down," he gets rid of the ball just before he gets munched by the DE. Unless you know there was a receiver to hit downfield, the check down is the throw that's available. I forgive him.

On the sack, I wonder with no clarity if he has the latitude to change plays. Zimmer wants an aggressive QB who never throws an interception and seems unlikely to tolerate any freelancing of any kind. I can see where this would be fine with Kirk, who strikes me as someone who has never seen a rule he isn't dying to follow. Bear in mind he may have been adjusting the blocking when he's pointing the blitz out, and no one seemed ready to receive a pass who was in the screen.

On the tying FG, come on. He drives them nearly 60 yards with no timeouts and gets the game to OT. And it wasn't the Vikings defense he was going against.

I get the frustration, but remember: He's Zimmer's chosen QB. Spielman and Zygi signed off on both contracts. That is who they wanted, and they can all leave together (though Cousins has to be traded). The premise was that we'd have an elite defense and a stellar running game, so Kirk just has to be good in play action and not throw INTs. He's the only one who held up his end of the bargain, and did so while Nero, er, Spielman, failed to upgrade the interior OL when he has a QB whose biggest flaw is a total inability to handle pressure up the middle.

He is their QB, not their excuse.
Post #: 1810
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/13/2021 9:12:15 PM   
Daniel Lee Young

 

Posts: 14012
Status: offline
Every says.. well at least here.. no one wants to play the Vikings in the playoffs..

I have watched almost 3/4 of the rams defense murder Arizona..

If our offense plays like they play.. rams are gonna pwn the Vikings on the 26th..

_____________________________

**** you all.
Post #: 1811
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/13/2021 9:30:42 PM   
Tom Sykes

 

Posts: 5872
Joined: 7/27/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes


Yes, for those holding onto optimism / a chance for the playoffs ... its got to be tough.



Nah, but it takes a little work to get off that natural negative train most humans seem comfortable living with ...

I was agreeing with your comment about dealing with negative bias– so not sure what you are 'nah'ing about.

The current frustration level [in here] is an appropriate reaction to the current state of the team. Yes, there are other ways to respond.

I don't know about a 'natural negative train' since most people are capable of both positive and negative ...

but if you want to 'work' at one approach, more power to you.

< Message edited by Tom Sykes -- 12/13/2021 9:38:32 PM >
Post #: 1812
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/14/2021 7:13:03 AM   
Ricky J


Posts: 18357
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes


Yes, for those holding onto optimism / a chance for the playoffs ... its got to be tough.



Nah, but it takes a little work to get off that natural negative train most humans seem comfortable living with ...

I was agreeing with your comment about dealing with negative bias– so not sure what you are 'nah'ing about.

The current frustration level [in here] is an appropriate reaction to the current state of the team. Yes, there are other ways to respond.

I don't know about a 'natural negative train' since most people are capable of both positive and negative ...

but if you want to 'work' at one approach, more power to you.


I don't agree with all you've said, but respect your opinion for sure.

re: nah - - It's not hard at all. What else do I have? Pretty soon it's all over until Aug.

People who say we don't deserve to get it drive me crazy. Of course we do. If we qualify for that 7th spot fair and square you damn right we deserve it!

And then beating GB will give us some temporary happiness.

Told my son last night AZ were pretenders and predicted the LA win - gee ain't I smart. Only thing bad about that imo is I'd rather play GB right away, not AZ.
Post #: 1813
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/14/2021 7:17:23 AM   
Ricky J


Posts: 18357
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline
Read on Twitter last night 37 people tested positive yesterday in the NFL - most ever in a day.

Keep wearing your masks people! It ain't hurting
Post #: 1814
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/14/2021 8:31:50 AM   
Tom Sykes

 

Posts: 5872
Joined: 7/27/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes


Yes, for those holding onto optimism / a chance for the playoffs ... its got to be tough.



Nah, but it takes a little work to get off that natural negative train most humans seem comfortable living with ...

I was agreeing with your comment about dealing with negative bias– so not sure what you are 'nah'ing about.

The current frustration level [in here] is an appropriate reaction to the current state of the team. Yes, there are other ways to respond.

I don't know about a 'natural negative train' since most people are capable of both positive and negative ...

but if you want to 'work' at one approach, more power to you.


I don't agree with all you've said, but respect your opinion for sure.

re: nah - - It's not hard at all. What else do I have? Pretty soon it's all over until Aug.

People who say we don't deserve to get it drive me crazy. Of course we do. If we qualify for that 7th spot fair and square you damn right we deserve it!

And then beating GB will give us some temporary happiness.

Told my son last night AZ were pretenders and predicted the LA win - gee ain't I smart. Only thing bad about that imo is I'd rather play GB right away, not AZ.

I'm guilty ... I can't deny it.

Its a shame. There are worse, much less talented Vikings teams that I have pulled for harder.

I do distinguish between the teams that deserve to be in the playoffs. Some teams are just good, others get there with a lot of help, and a few teams have no business being there – that get in because there are a set number of teams.

Deserving or not, that doesn't mean I won't sit glued to every Vikings game, hoping for the best.

Also, I totally agree AZ is not legit. For every bad bounce we've had, they've had 10 good bounces. Will that carry them through the playoffs? I highly doubt it.

< Message edited by Tom Sykes -- 12/14/2021 8:33:58 AM >
Post #: 1815
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/14/2021 9:47:44 AM   
David F.


Posts: 10864
Joined: 12/31/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bohumm

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

Here's the highlights from week 1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqkdUIOmxNc

At 3:38 there's a near unforgivable check down
At 8:44 our terrible defense sacks Burrows to force a fourth down from deep in their territory and have given up just 24 points in the middle of the fourth quarter
At 8:58 is the play I talked about earlier. Dude just stands there and takes a sack from pressure he pointed out just seconds earlier.
At 9:34 our terrible defense stops Cincinnati again giving us another chance

From there we use our 1:48 to hit a mix of check downs and one nice pass up the middle to Conklin to get just into field goal range. Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking? Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking or CHANGING THE PLAY when the blitzer was coming and we didn't have the numbers to stop him? Probably.

Also you'll notice that Breeland was ass for the entire game as well.

Kirk has no forward lean, stipulated. Risk averse, check. Poor pocket presence, ya buddy. That said:

On the "near unforgivable check down," he gets rid of the ball just before he gets munched by the DE. Unless you know there was a receiver to hit downfield, the check down is the throw that's available. I forgive him.

On the sack, I wonder with no clarity if he has the latitude to change plays. Zimmer wants an aggressive QB who never throws an interception and seems unlikely to tolerate any freelancing of any kind. I can see where this would be fine with Kirk, who strikes me as someone who has never seen a rule he isn't dying to follow. Bear in mind he may have been adjusting the blocking when he's pointing the blitz out, and no one seemed ready to receive a pass who was in the screen.

On the tying FG, come on. He drives them nearly 60 yards with no timeouts and gets the game to OT. And it wasn't the Vikings defense he was going against.

I get the frustration, but remember: He's Zimmer's chosen QB. Spielman and Zygi signed off on both contracts. That is who they wanted, and they can all leave together (though Cousins has to be traded). The premise was that we'd have an elite defense and a stellar running game, so Kirk just has to be good in play action and not throw INTs. He's the only one who held up his end of the bargain, and did so while Nero, er, Spielman, failed to upgrade the interior OL when he has a QB whose biggest flaw is a total inability to handle pressure up the middle.

He is their QB, not their excuse.


Your reply is sensible and valid. That being said, allow me to retort.

On the checkdown, Kirk is not under any pressure. Yes the DE gets near him after he throws but he had ample time to throw and he still could have used his internal clock (yes - I know he doesn't have one) to know it was time to step up or scramble to his right to buy even more time. Even average QBs do this all the time. As it sits, that play would not even qualify as a hurry for the Bengal defense.

On the sack, let's just ignore the whole "didn't/couldn't/not-allowed to change the play" element which is still a really big deal; he still needs to throw that ball deep regardless of coverage or who's open. Aaron Rodgers does this all the time. You can get a completion, and incompletion, a penalty or an interception. All four of those are just fine on third down throwing deep. Taking a sack with the same look on your face as a deer in the middle of a country road at nigh is not.

The tying FG: Here's the play-by-play:

1st & 10 at MIN 5
(1:47 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short middle to D.Cook to MIN 12 for 7 yards (V.Bell; R.Allen).

2nd & 3 at MIN 12
(1:30 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass deep middle to T.Conklin to MIN 39 for 27 yards (J.Bates).

1st & 10 at MIN 39
(1:11 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass incomplete deep left to K.Osborn.

2nd & 10 at MIN 39
(1:07 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short right to D.Cook pushed ob at MIN 39 for no gain (R.Allen).

3rd & 10 at MIN 39
(1:01 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short right to K.Osborn to MIN 45 for 6 yards (C.Awuzie; R.Allen).

4th & 4 at MIN 45
(0:37 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short middle to K.Osborn to CIN 49 for 6 yards (M.Hilton).

1st & 10 at CIN 49
(0:19 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short right to A.Thielen to CIN 35 for 14 yards (E.Apple).

1st & 10 at CIN 35
(0:03 - 4th) K.Cousins spiked the ball to stop the clock.

(0:03 - 4th) Timeout #2 by CIN at 00:03.

2nd & 10 at CIN 35
(0:00 - 4th) G.Joseph 53 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-A.DePaola, Holder-J.Berry.

Look at all the completions for less than 10 yards that were in bounds. There are four pass plays that are completions that total 19 yards and ate up 65 or our 108 seconds. Weak.

_____________________________

I wouldn't give ANY qb $30-50+ mil unless that QB had won me a Super Bowl. Did you win a Super Bowl on your rookie deal? Yes? Great! Here's your hugenormous contract. F it let's just run victory laps and love life. No? Good luck. Next!
Post #: 1816
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/14/2021 10:00:39 AM   
TJSweens


Posts: 45022
Joined: 7/16/2007
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bohumm

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

Here's the highlights from week 1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqkdUIOmxNc

At 3:38 there's a near unforgivable check down
At 8:44 our terrible defense sacks Burrows to force a fourth down from deep in their territory and have given up just 24 points in the middle of the fourth quarter
At 8:58 is the play I talked about earlier. Dude just stands there and takes a sack from pressure he pointed out just seconds earlier.
At 9:34 our terrible defense stops Cincinnati again giving us another chance

From there we use our 1:48 to hit a mix of check downs and one nice pass up the middle to Conklin to get just into field goal range. Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking? Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking or CHANGING THE PLAY when the blitzer was coming and we didn't have the numbers to stop him? Probably.

Also you'll notice that Breeland was ass for the entire game as well.

Kirk has no forward lean, stipulated. Risk averse, check. Poor pocket presence, ya buddy. That said:

On the "near unforgivable check down," he gets rid of the ball just before he gets munched by the DE. Unless you know there was a receiver to hit downfield, the check down is the throw that's available. I forgive him.

On the sack, I wonder with no clarity if he has the latitude to change plays. Zimmer wants an aggressive QB who never throws an interception and seems unlikely to tolerate any freelancing of any kind. I can see where this would be fine with Kirk, who strikes me as someone who has never seen a rule he isn't dying to follow. Bear in mind he may have been adjusting the blocking when he's pointing the blitz out, and no one seemed ready to receive a pass who was in the screen.

On the tying FG, come on. He drives them nearly 60 yards with no timeouts and gets the game to OT. And it wasn't the Vikings defense he was going against.

I get the frustration, but remember: He's Zimmer's chosen QB. Spielman and Zygi signed off on both contracts. That is who they wanted, and they can all leave together (though Cousins has to be traded). The premise was that we'd have an elite defense and a stellar running game, so Kirk just has to be good in play action and not throw INTs. He's the only one who held up his end of the bargain, and did so while Nero, er, Spielman, failed to upgrade the interior OL when he has a QB whose biggest flaw is a total inability to handle pressure up the middle.

He is their QB, not their excuse.


Your reply is sensible and valid. That being said, allow me to retort.

On the checkdown, Kirk is not under any pressure. Yes the DE gets near him after he throws but he had ample time to throw and he still could have used his internal clock (yes - I know he doesn't have one) to know it was time to step up or scramble to his right to buy even more time. Even average QBs do this all the time. As it sits, that play would not even qualify as a hurry for the Bengal defense.

On the sack, let's just ignore the whole "didn't/couldn't/not-allowed to change the play" element which is still a really big deal; he still needs to throw that ball deep regardless of coverage or who's open. Aaron Rodgers does this all the time. You can get a completion, and incompletion, a penalty or an interception. All four of those are just fine on third down throwing deep. Taking a sack with the same look on your face as a deer in the middle of a country road at nigh is not.

The tying FG: Here's the play-by-play:

1st & 10 at MIN 5
(1:47 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short middle to D.Cook to MIN 12 for 7 yards (V.Bell; R.Allen).

2nd & 3 at MIN 12
(1:30 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass deep middle to T.Conklin to MIN 39 for 27 yards (J.Bates).

1st & 10 at MIN 39
(1:11 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass incomplete deep left to K.Osborn.

2nd & 10 at MIN 39
(1:07 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short right to D.Cook pushed ob at MIN 39 for no gain (R.Allen).

3rd & 10 at MIN 39
(1:01 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short right to K.Osborn to MIN 45 for 6 yards (C.Awuzie; R.Allen).

4th & 4 at MIN 45
(0:37 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short middle to K.Osborn to CIN 49 for 6 yards (M.Hilton).

1st & 10 at CIN 49
(0:19 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short right to A.Thielen to CIN 35 for 14 yards (E.Apple).

1st & 10 at CIN 35
(0:03 - 4th) K.Cousins spiked the ball to stop the clock.

(0:03 - 4th) Timeout #2 by CIN at 00:03.

2nd & 10 at CIN 35
(0:00 - 4th) G.Joseph 53 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-A.DePaola, Holder-J.Berry.

Look at all the completions for less than 10 yards that were in bounds. There are four pass plays that are completions that total 19 yards and ate up 65 or our 108 seconds. Weak.

There is nothing weak about driving a team 60 yards, including a crucial 4th down conversion, to tie the game. The goal is to get the points, not to be aesthetically pleasing.

_____________________________

"The eternal fate of the noble and enlightened: to be brutally crushed by the armed and dumb."
Post #: 1817
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/14/2021 10:08:20 AM   
David F.


Posts: 10864
Joined: 12/31/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bohumm

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

Here's the highlights from week 1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqkdUIOmxNc

At 3:38 there's a near unforgivable check down
At 8:44 our terrible defense sacks Burrows to force a fourth down from deep in their territory and have given up just 24 points in the middle of the fourth quarter
At 8:58 is the play I talked about earlier. Dude just stands there and takes a sack from pressure he pointed out just seconds earlier.
At 9:34 our terrible defense stops Cincinnati again giving us another chance

From there we use our 1:48 to hit a mix of check downs and one nice pass up the middle to Conklin to get just into field goal range. Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking? Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking or CHANGING THE PLAY when the blitzer was coming and we didn't have the numbers to stop him? Probably.

Also you'll notice that Breeland was ass for the entire game as well.

Kirk has no forward lean, stipulated. Risk averse, check. Poor pocket presence, ya buddy. That said:

On the "near unforgivable check down," he gets rid of the ball just before he gets munched by the DE. Unless you know there was a receiver to hit downfield, the check down is the throw that's available. I forgive him.

On the sack, I wonder with no clarity if he has the latitude to change plays. Zimmer wants an aggressive QB who never throws an interception and seems unlikely to tolerate any freelancing of any kind. I can see where this would be fine with Kirk, who strikes me as someone who has never seen a rule he isn't dying to follow. Bear in mind he may have been adjusting the blocking when he's pointing the blitz out, and no one seemed ready to receive a pass who was in the screen.

On the tying FG, come on. He drives them nearly 60 yards with no timeouts and gets the game to OT. And it wasn't the Vikings defense he was going against.

I get the frustration, but remember: He's Zimmer's chosen QB. Spielman and Zygi signed off on both contracts. That is who they wanted, and they can all leave together (though Cousins has to be traded). The premise was that we'd have an elite defense and a stellar running game, so Kirk just has to be good in play action and not throw INTs. He's the only one who held up his end of the bargain, and did so while Nero, er, Spielman, failed to upgrade the interior OL when he has a QB whose biggest flaw is a total inability to handle pressure up the middle.

He is their QB, not their excuse.


Your reply is sensible and valid. That being said, allow me to retort.

On the checkdown, Kirk is not under any pressure. Yes the DE gets near him after he throws but he had ample time to throw and he still could have used his internal clock (yes - I know he doesn't have one) to know it was time to step up or scramble to his right to buy even more time. Even average QBs do this all the time. As it sits, that play would not even qualify as a hurry for the Bengal defense.

On the sack, let's just ignore the whole "didn't/couldn't/not-allowed to change the play" element which is still a really big deal; he still needs to throw that ball deep regardless of coverage or who's open. Aaron Rodgers does this all the time. You can get a completion, and incompletion, a penalty or an interception. All four of those are just fine on third down throwing deep. Taking a sack with the same look on your face as a deer in the middle of a country road at nigh is not.

The tying FG: Here's the play-by-play:

1st & 10 at MIN 5
(1:47 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short middle to D.Cook to MIN 12 for 7 yards (V.Bell; R.Allen).

2nd & 3 at MIN 12
(1:30 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass deep middle to T.Conklin to MIN 39 for 27 yards (J.Bates).

1st & 10 at MIN 39
(1:11 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass incomplete deep left to K.Osborn.

2nd & 10 at MIN 39
(1:07 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short right to D.Cook pushed ob at MIN 39 for no gain (R.Allen).

3rd & 10 at MIN 39
(1:01 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short right to K.Osborn to MIN 45 for 6 yards (C.Awuzie; R.Allen).

4th & 4 at MIN 45
(0:37 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short middle to K.Osborn to CIN 49 for 6 yards (M.Hilton).

1st & 10 at CIN 49
(0:19 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short right to A.Thielen to CIN 35 for 14 yards (E.Apple).

1st & 10 at CIN 35
(0:03 - 4th) K.Cousins spiked the ball to stop the clock.

(0:03 - 4th) Timeout #2 by CIN at 00:03.

2nd & 10 at CIN 35
(0:00 - 4th) G.Joseph 53 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-A.DePaola, Holder-J.Berry.

Look at all the completions for less than 10 yards that were in bounds. There are four pass plays that are completions that total 19 yards and ate up 65 or our 108 seconds. Weak.

There is nothing weak about driving a team 60 yards, including a crucial 4th down conversion, to tie the game. The goal is to get the points, not to be aesthetically pleasing.


A touchdown is both aesthetically pleasing and also wins the game. We were at our own 39 yard line with 1:30 remaining and Check Down Charlie checked down like the Checkdowniest Charlie that ever checked down. The big boys with balls try to win games not just do the minimum to keep alive.

_____________________________

I wouldn't give ANY qb $30-50+ mil unless that QB had won me a Super Bowl. Did you win a Super Bowl on your rookie deal? Yes? Great! Here's your hugenormous contract. F it let's just run victory laps and love life. No? Good luck. Next!
Post #: 1818
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/14/2021 12:02:08 PM   
ronhextall


Posts: 6271
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline
the biggest question for me with Cousins is this....

Is he not allowed to audible or does he choose not to?
Post #: 1819
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/14/2021 12:38:46 PM   
TJSweens


Posts: 45022
Joined: 7/16/2007
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bohumm

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

Here's the highlights from week 1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqkdUIOmxNc

At 3:38 there's a near unforgivable check down
At 8:44 our terrible defense sacks Burrows to force a fourth down from deep in their territory and have given up just 24 points in the middle of the fourth quarter
At 8:58 is the play I talked about earlier. Dude just stands there and takes a sack from pressure he pointed out just seconds earlier.
At 9:34 our terrible defense stops Cincinnati again giving us another chance

From there we use our 1:48 to hit a mix of check downs and one nice pass up the middle to Conklin to get just into field goal range. Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking? Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking or CHANGING THE PLAY when the blitzer was coming and we didn't have the numbers to stop him? Probably.

Also you'll notice that Breeland was ass for the entire game as well.

Kirk has no forward lean, stipulated. Risk averse, check. Poor pocket presence, ya buddy. That said:

On the "near unforgivable check down," he gets rid of the ball just before he gets munched by the DE. Unless you know there was a receiver to hit downfield, the check down is the throw that's available. I forgive him.

On the sack, I wonder with no clarity if he has the latitude to change plays. Zimmer wants an aggressive QB who never throws an interception and seems unlikely to tolerate any freelancing of any kind. I can see where this would be fine with Kirk, who strikes me as someone who has never seen a rule he isn't dying to follow. Bear in mind he may have been adjusting the blocking when he's pointing the blitz out, and no one seemed ready to receive a pass who was in the screen.

On the tying FG, come on. He drives them nearly 60 yards with no timeouts and gets the game to OT. And it wasn't the Vikings defense he was going against.

I get the frustration, but remember: He's Zimmer's chosen QB. Spielman and Zygi signed off on both contracts. That is who they wanted, and they can all leave together (though Cousins has to be traded). The premise was that we'd have an elite defense and a stellar running game, so Kirk just has to be good in play action and not throw INTs. He's the only one who held up his end of the bargain, and did so while Nero, er, Spielman, failed to upgrade the interior OL when he has a QB whose biggest flaw is a total inability to handle pressure up the middle.

He is their QB, not their excuse.


Your reply is sensible and valid. That being said, allow me to retort.

On the checkdown, Kirk is not under any pressure. Yes the DE gets near him after he throws but he had ample time to throw and he still could have used his internal clock (yes - I know he doesn't have one) to know it was time to step up or scramble to his right to buy even more time. Even average QBs do this all the time. As it sits, that play would not even qualify as a hurry for the Bengal defense.

On the sack, let's just ignore the whole "didn't/couldn't/not-allowed to change the play" element which is still a really big deal; he still needs to throw that ball deep regardless of coverage or who's open. Aaron Rodgers does this all the time. You can get a completion, and incompletion, a penalty or an interception. All four of those are just fine on third down throwing deep. Taking a sack with the same look on your face as a deer in the middle of a country road at nigh is not.

The tying FG: Here's the play-by-play:

1st & 10 at MIN 5
(1:47 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short middle to D.Cook to MIN 12 for 7 yards (V.Bell; R.Allen).

2nd & 3 at MIN 12
(1:30 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass deep middle to T.Conklin to MIN 39 for 27 yards (J.Bates).

1st & 10 at MIN 39
(1:11 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass incomplete deep left to K.Osborn.

2nd & 10 at MIN 39
(1:07 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short right to D.Cook pushed ob at MIN 39 for no gain (R.Allen).

3rd & 10 at MIN 39
(1:01 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short right to K.Osborn to MIN 45 for 6 yards (C.Awuzie; R.Allen).

4th & 4 at MIN 45
(0:37 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short middle to K.Osborn to CIN 49 for 6 yards (M.Hilton).

1st & 10 at CIN 49
(0:19 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short right to A.Thielen to CIN 35 for 14 yards (E.Apple).

1st & 10 at CIN 35
(0:03 - 4th) K.Cousins spiked the ball to stop the clock.

(0:03 - 4th) Timeout #2 by CIN at 00:03.

2nd & 10 at CIN 35
(0:00 - 4th) G.Joseph 53 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-A.DePaola, Holder-J.Berry.

Look at all the completions for less than 10 yards that were in bounds. There are four pass plays that are completions that total 19 yards and ate up 65 or our 108 seconds. Weak.

There is nothing weak about driving a team 60 yards, including a crucial 4th down conversion, to tie the game. The goal is to get the points, not to be aesthetically pleasing.


A touchdown is both aesthetically pleasing and also wins the game. We were at our own 39 yard line with 1:30 remaining and Check Down Charlie checked down like the Checkdowniest Charlie that ever checked down. The big boys with balls try to win games not just do the minimum to keep alive.

The goal posts move again. Before the season all we heard was that Cousins couldn't get it done at the end of games. Now he is producing in the last 2 minutes and that isn't good enough either. The smart QB takes what the defense gives him in that scenario. That’s what he did. I would love a TD in that scenario too, bit the defense was taking away deep and the side lines and giving the middle.

_____________________________

"The eternal fate of the noble and enlightened: to be brutally crushed by the armed and dumb."
Post #: 1820
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/14/2021 12:39:37 PM   
Trekgeekscott


Posts: 39282
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: bohumm

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

Here's the highlights from week 1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqkdUIOmxNc

At 3:38 there's a near unforgivable check down
At 8:44 our terrible defense sacks Burrows to force a fourth down from deep in their territory and have given up just 24 points in the middle of the fourth quarter
At 8:58 is the play I talked about earlier. Dude just stands there and takes a sack from pressure he pointed out just seconds earlier.
At 9:34 our terrible defense stops Cincinnati again giving us another chance

From there we use our 1:48 to hit a mix of check downs and one nice pass up the middle to Conklin to get just into field goal range. Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking? Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking or CHANGING THE PLAY when the blitzer was coming and we didn't have the numbers to stop him? Probably.

Also you'll notice that Breeland was ass for the entire game as well.

Kirk has no forward lean, stipulated. Risk averse, check. Poor pocket presence, ya buddy. That said:

On the "near unforgivable check down," he gets rid of the ball just before he gets munched by the DE. Unless you know there was a receiver to hit downfield, the check down is the throw that's available. I forgive him.

On the sack, I wonder with no clarity if he has the latitude to change plays. Zimmer wants an aggressive QB who never throws an interception and seems unlikely to tolerate any freelancing of any kind. I can see where this would be fine with Kirk, who strikes me as someone who has never seen a rule he isn't dying to follow. Bear in mind he may have been adjusting the blocking when he's pointing the blitz out, and no one seemed ready to receive a pass who was in the screen.

On the tying FG, come on. He drives them nearly 60 yards with no timeouts and gets the game to OT. And it wasn't the Vikings defense he was going against.

I get the frustration, but remember: He's Zimmer's chosen QB. Spielman and Zygi signed off on both contracts. That is who they wanted, and they can all leave together (though Cousins has to be traded). The premise was that we'd have an elite defense and a stellar running game, so Kirk just has to be good in play action and not throw INTs. He's the only one who held up his end of the bargain, and did so while Nero, er, Spielman, failed to upgrade the interior OL when he has a QB whose biggest flaw is a total inability to handle pressure up the middle.

He is their QB, not their excuse.


Actually, I don't think Zimmer really wanted him originally.

_____________________________

“There is no hate like Christian love.”
Post #: 1821
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/14/2021 12:48:39 PM   
David Levine


Posts: 77940
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: bohumm

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

Here's the highlights from week 1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqkdUIOmxNc

At 3:38 there's a near unforgivable check down
At 8:44 our terrible defense sacks Burrows to force a fourth down from deep in their territory and have given up just 24 points in the middle of the fourth quarter
At 8:58 is the play I talked about earlier. Dude just stands there and takes a sack from pressure he pointed out just seconds earlier.
At 9:34 our terrible defense stops Cincinnati again giving us another chance

From there we use our 1:48 to hit a mix of check downs and one nice pass up the middle to Conklin to get just into field goal range. Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking? Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking or CHANGING THE PLAY when the blitzer was coming and we didn't have the numbers to stop him? Probably.

Also you'll notice that Breeland was ass for the entire game as well.

Kirk has no forward lean, stipulated. Risk averse, check. Poor pocket presence, ya buddy. That said:

On the "near unforgivable check down," he gets rid of the ball just before he gets munched by the DE. Unless you know there was a receiver to hit downfield, the check down is the throw that's available. I forgive him.

On the sack, I wonder with no clarity if he has the latitude to change plays. Zimmer wants an aggressive QB who never throws an interception and seems unlikely to tolerate any freelancing of any kind. I can see where this would be fine with Kirk, who strikes me as someone who has never seen a rule he isn't dying to follow. Bear in mind he may have been adjusting the blocking when he's pointing the blitz out, and no one seemed ready to receive a pass who was in the screen.

On the tying FG, come on. He drives them nearly 60 yards with no timeouts and gets the game to OT. And it wasn't the Vikings defense he was going against.

I get the frustration, but remember: He's Zimmer's chosen QB. Spielman and Zygi signed off on both contracts. That is who they wanted, and they can all leave together (though Cousins has to be traded). The premise was that we'd have an elite defense and a stellar running game, so Kirk just has to be good in play action and not throw INTs. He's the only one who held up his end of the bargain, and did so while Nero, er, Spielman, failed to upgrade the interior OL when he has a QB whose biggest flaw is a total inability to handle pressure up the middle.

He is their QB, not their excuse.


Actually, I don't think Zimmer really wanted him originally.


I'm pretty sure you're right.

He hated Keenum. Even though he had the most professional success with him, you could hear in his quotes how much he hated the freelancing.

With Cousins, Zim has mostly just toed the company line, but he's never seemed particularly thrilled to have him. And it sounds like this is the first year the two of them have even tried to have any kind of relationship.

I think the only QB that Zimmer has truly embraced has been Teddy.
Post #: 1822
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/14/2021 12:51:16 PM   
TJSweens


Posts: 45022
Joined: 7/16/2007
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: ronhextall

the biggest question for me with Cousins is this....

Is he not allowed to audible or does he choose not to?

That is a good question. I have a feeling it's a bit of both. Cousins is too risk averse as it is. Zimmer is a risk averse coach who wants it done his way all of the time. He fired an OC mid season for not following his wishes.

_____________________________

"The eternal fate of the noble and enlightened: to be brutally crushed by the armed and dumb."
Post #: 1823
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/14/2021 1:21:56 PM  4 votes
David F.


Posts: 10864
Joined: 12/31/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bohumm

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

Here's the highlights from week 1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqkdUIOmxNc

At 3:38 there's a near unforgivable check down
At 8:44 our terrible defense sacks Burrows to force a fourth down from deep in their territory and have given up just 24 points in the middle of the fourth quarter
At 8:58 is the play I talked about earlier. Dude just stands there and takes a sack from pressure he pointed out just seconds earlier.
At 9:34 our terrible defense stops Cincinnati again giving us another chance

From there we use our 1:48 to hit a mix of check downs and one nice pass up the middle to Conklin to get just into field goal range. Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking? Was a TD possible with some extra risk taking or CHANGING THE PLAY when the blitzer was coming and we didn't have the numbers to stop him? Probably.

Also you'll notice that Breeland was ass for the entire game as well.

Kirk has no forward lean, stipulated. Risk averse, check. Poor pocket presence, ya buddy. That said:

On the "near unforgivable check down," he gets rid of the ball just before he gets munched by the DE. Unless you know there was a receiver to hit downfield, the check down is the throw that's available. I forgive him.

On the sack, I wonder with no clarity if he has the latitude to change plays. Zimmer wants an aggressive QB who never throws an interception and seems unlikely to tolerate any freelancing of any kind. I can see where this would be fine with Kirk, who strikes me as someone who has never seen a rule he isn't dying to follow. Bear in mind he may have been adjusting the blocking when he's pointing the blitz out, and no one seemed ready to receive a pass who was in the screen.

On the tying FG, come on. He drives them nearly 60 yards with no timeouts and gets the game to OT. And it wasn't the Vikings defense he was going against.

I get the frustration, but remember: He's Zimmer's chosen QB. Spielman and Zygi signed off on both contracts. That is who they wanted, and they can all leave together (though Cousins has to be traded). The premise was that we'd have an elite defense and a stellar running game, so Kirk just has to be good in play action and not throw INTs. He's the only one who held up his end of the bargain, and did so while Nero, er, Spielman, failed to upgrade the interior OL when he has a QB whose biggest flaw is a total inability to handle pressure up the middle.

He is their QB, not their excuse.


Your reply is sensible and valid. That being said, allow me to retort.

On the checkdown, Kirk is not under any pressure. Yes the DE gets near him after he throws but he had ample time to throw and he still could have used his internal clock (yes - I know he doesn't have one) to know it was time to step up or scramble to his right to buy even more time. Even average QBs do this all the time. As it sits, that play would not even qualify as a hurry for the Bengal defense.

On the sack, let's just ignore the whole "didn't/couldn't/not-allowed to change the play" element which is still a really big deal; he still needs to throw that ball deep regardless of coverage or who's open. Aaron Rodgers does this all the time. You can get a completion, and incompletion, a penalty or an interception. All four of those are just fine on third down throwing deep. Taking a sack with the same look on your face as a deer in the middle of a country road at nigh is not.

The tying FG: Here's the play-by-play:

1st & 10 at MIN 5
(1:47 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short middle to D.Cook to MIN 12 for 7 yards (V.Bell; R.Allen).

2nd & 3 at MIN 12
(1:30 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass deep middle to T.Conklin to MIN 39 for 27 yards (J.Bates).

1st & 10 at MIN 39
(1:11 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass incomplete deep left to K.Osborn.

2nd & 10 at MIN 39
(1:07 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short right to D.Cook pushed ob at MIN 39 for no gain (R.Allen).

3rd & 10 at MIN 39
(1:01 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short right to K.Osborn to MIN 45 for 6 yards (C.Awuzie; R.Allen).

4th & 4 at MIN 45
(0:37 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short middle to K.Osborn to CIN 49 for 6 yards (M.Hilton).

1st & 10 at CIN 49
(0:19 - 4th) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short right to A.Thielen to CIN 35 for 14 yards (E.Apple).

1st & 10 at CIN 35
(0:03 - 4th) K.Cousins spiked the ball to stop the clock.

(0:03 - 4th) Timeout #2 by CIN at 00:03.

2nd & 10 at CIN 35
(0:00 - 4th) G.Joseph 53 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-A.DePaola, Holder-J.Berry.

Look at all the completions for less than 10 yards that were in bounds. There are four pass plays that are completions that total 19 yards and ate up 65 or our 108 seconds. Weak.

There is nothing weak about driving a team 60 yards, including a crucial 4th down conversion, to tie the game. The goal is to get the points, not to be aesthetically pleasing.


A touchdown is both aesthetically pleasing and also wins the game. We were at our own 39 yard line with 1:30 remaining and Check Down Charlie checked down like the Checkdowniest Charlie that ever checked down. The big boys with balls try to win games not just do the minimum to keep alive.

The goal posts move again. Before the season all we heard was that Cousins couldn't get it done at the end of games. Now he is producing in the last 2 minutes and that isn't good enough either. The smart QB takes what the defense gives him in that scenario. That’s what he did. I would love a TD in that scenario too, bit the defense was taking away deep and the side lines and giving the middle.


I neither set nor moved the goal posts. If that's the best Cousins could do with nearly two minutes then his best is simply not good enough. I've watched lesser QBs with lesser teams move the ball with ease in the final two minutes. Cincinnati is the 19th ranked D in yards and 26th ranked D in points. Gotta get more than 19 yards in 65 of the 107 seconds.

< Message edited by David F. -- 12/14/2021 1:23:03 PM >


_____________________________

I wouldn't give ANY qb $30-50+ mil unless that QB had won me a Super Bowl. Did you win a Super Bowl on your rookie deal? Yes? Great! Here's your hugenormous contract. F it let's just run victory laps and love life. No? Good luck. Next!
Post #: 1824
RE: General Vikes Talk - 12/14/2021 2:57:13 PM   
beo

 

Posts: 2394
Joined: 3/18/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ronhextall

the biggest question for me with Cousins is this....

Is he not allowed to audible or does he choose not to?


The quote from Kirk that worried me... after a couple games of the offense going full throttle a reporter gives him the softball:
paraphrase "Are you going to keep the offense wide open from now on?"

Kirk "I'm going to keep doing whatever the coaches tell me to do."

Maybe nit picking.
Not much fire.
Not much ownership.
Just... I'm a company guy... tell me what to do and I'll do it.
It's not the worst attitude in the world... I just don't know that it's a champion attitude either.
Post #: 1825
Page:   <<   < prev  71 72 [73] 74 75   next >   >>
All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> Vikes Talk >> RE: General Vikes Talk Page: <<   < prev  71 72 [73] 74 75   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode