Week 2: Vikings at Cardinals

One Stop Spot For All Vikings Related News
User avatar
Monster
Posts: 23395
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Week 2: Vikings at Cardinals

Post by Monster »

bleedspeed177 wrote:The offense has been good enough to win. I just look at this team and had hope for a good defense. We have invested a lot on that side of the ball and it has not netted good results so far. If we score 24 points in a game I expect us to win.


I'm not super surprised that the defense has been uneven so far. There are some new faces and Zimmer's stuff usually takes a bit for guys to get down. It's still disappointing though.

I'll add that after tonight the best record anyone in the division will have is 1-1 and only 2 teams will have that commanding lead. I never had super high hopes for this season but there is still a chance it can be a reasonably successful one. So far Kirk Cousins has done his job. I think next week if they want Mannion to be the backup they have to actually sign him.
User avatar
bleedspeed
Posts: 8161
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Week 2: Vikings at Cardinals

Post by bleedspeed »

monsterpile wrote:
bleedspeed177 wrote:The offense has been good enough to win. I just look at this team and had hope for a good defense. We have invested a lot on that side of the ball and it has not netted good results so far. If we score 24 points in a game I expect us to win.


I'm not super surprised that the defense has been uneven so far. There are some new faces and Zimmer's stuff usually takes a bit for guys to get down. It's still disappointing though.

I'll add that after tonight the best record anyone in the division will have is 1-1 and only 2 teams will have that commanding lead. I never had super high hopes for this season but there is still a chance it can be a reasonably successful one. So far Kirk Cousins has done his job. I think next week if they want Mannion to be the backup they have to actually sign him.


That makes sense, but would I never thought it would be this bad. I guess getting 2 turnovers is a good sign, but we couldn't even slow them down without a turnover.

Being 1 back in the division is a plus. It was part of the reason I didn't get too worked up last week when everyone lost.

The whole Mannion obsession is strange to me. He is a coach at this level and shouldn't be taking up a roster spot.
User avatar
TheGrey08
Posts: 1837
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Week 2: Vikings at Cardinals

Post by TheGrey08 »

While I agree he has to make that kick, we've seen how many kickers miss from PAT range after the 2015 change. My immediate reaction after the play to the 20 yard line and seeing the clock tick lower and lower was oh no.. they are not just running the clock down to kick it are they? I just didn't feel good about it. 35+ seconds left in the game with a timeout left and on first down. I'd have run it with Dalvin at least once more.
User avatar
Monster
Posts: 23395
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Week 2: Vikings at Cardinals

Post by Monster »

bleedspeed177 wrote:
monsterpile wrote:
bleedspeed177 wrote:The offense has been good enough to win. I just look at this team and had hope for a good defense. We have invested a lot on that side of the ball and it has not netted good results so far. If we score 24 points in a game I expect us to win.


I'm not super surprised that the defense has been uneven so far. There are some new faces and Zimmer's stuff usually takes a bit for guys to get down. It's still disappointing though.

I'll add that after tonight the best record anyone in the division will have is 1-1 and only 2 teams will have that commanding lead. I never had super high hopes for this season but there is still a chance it can be a reasonably successful one. So far Kirk Cousins has done his job. I think next week if they want Mannion to be the backup they have to actually sign him.


That makes sense, but would I never thought it would be this bad. I guess getting 2 turnovers is a good sign, but we couldn't even slow them down without a turnover.

Being 1 back in the division is a plus. It was part of the reason I didn't get too worked up last week when everyone lost.

The whole Mannion obsession is strange to me. He is a coach at this level and shouldn't be taking up a roster spot.


I think there was a bit of a perfect storm for Mannion to return.

1. New OC in Klint Kubiak.
2. Mond missing valuable practice time due to Covid.
3. Browning instead of taking some sort of meaningful step forward (which looked to be the case just a few weeks ago) looked horrible in preseason.
4. Nate Stanley was injured. This likely VERY minor but it probably doesn't help.

I believe the Vikings planned to have Mond as their backup and then Browning was a bit of a backup plan to that. All of them even Stanley fell through. I don't think they wanted to bring in someone that didn't know the offense and Mannion was cheap and available. If you actually watched his preseason reps for a Seattle he actually looked pretty solid. Do I think he is amazing? No. Do I think he might have been the best option for them at the time? Possibly. Meanwhile the Raiders signed Sloter because Mariotta is hurt. It would be nice to have someone as exciting relatively speaking as Mariotta as a backup. Hopefully soon that will be the case with Mond taking over that spot.
User avatar
FNG
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2020 12:00 am

Re: Week 2: Vikings at Cardinals

Post by FNG »

TheGrey08 wrote:While I agree he has to make that kick, we've seen how many kickers miss from PAT range after the 2015 change. My immediate reaction after the play to the 20 yard line and seeing the clock tick lower and lower was oh no.. they are not just running the clock down to kick it are they? I just didn't feel good about it. 35+ seconds left in the game with a timeout left and on first down. I'd have run it with Dalvin at least once more.


Grey, you might be surprised at the results through week 2 on PATs and FGs between 30-39 yards. Kickers have made 146 out of 154 extra points this season (95%), and 28 of 30 FGs from that range (93%). If I have a 93% chance of winning the game, and running another play could result in a penalty pushing us back or, even worse, a fumble like the one that cost us a win last week, I'll take the 93% chance of winning every time. I hear your point that it seems overly cautious, but it seems like the right percentage move to me.
Post Reply