Guests - If You want access to member only forums on FM. You will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up on Fishing Minnesota.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
fish4cats

It is definitely coaching

31 posts in this topic

How can you have the #1 running back in the NFL and not start him? This team will go nowhere with Childress as head coach. If they win todays game it will be on the back of the players and not how the game was coached.

To much talent on this team to be 8 and 7 (possibly 8 & 8) and be trailing Denver going into halftime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Young Troy probably has dropped his last ball for Chili. They are ending the season playing the way they started and chili is still running around on the sideline looking at his play board. It is sad to watch. Will all this change next year?? The dysfunction starts at the top--whoever that is-- we are now the oakland of the north.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if it is all about coaching here... having peterson not start is really no big deal.

what I don't understand is why they keep giving Williamson a chance to play. One extremely catchable ball all alone and he cannot bring it in.

I see more in execution of the plays...Our team seems to have lost confidence in what they are doing. Taking too many risks (first offensive posession and a risky move to try and score...and...ohp...a fumble and touchback.)

The TEAM is not playing smart. Dumb mistakes, careless penalties (helmet to helmet on receiver) just is not quality play. I will say I have not been a huge fan of childress, but I see more in the player execution problems rather than coaching...

Getting a young team up to speed takes time. With childress coming aboard, we have to give him time to get this team up and going strong..it's not going to happen over night. It takes a few years....I'm not about to say get rid of childress yet...he's just getting started. We need better receiving corps that actually give us a bigger threat, and multiple offensive options. Right now, all we have is a running game. Easy to defend right now since the pass is not a very strong option. Given a couple of good draft picks, or free agent pick-ups, we could be in business...it just takes time.

Think back to the 80s for a moment...remember when San Fran was strong? They were young and it took a few years to get things going...when they did, they were hard to beat.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kind of hard to blame this game on Chili. Taylor) (2) fumbles, Williamson (Stone Hands) 2 drops (so far). The only questionable coaching so far today was challenging the spot of the ball confused.gif. Other that that the loss is on the players today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree partly with what you are saying, but. What kind of message are you sending to your team when you dont start your star player, who by the way was voted to captain by his teammates and coaching staff. I just havent seen any motivation from childress to win these last 2 games. You have to admit that the Washington and Denver a very beatable teams and the vikes should have been in the playoffs already last week.

As for a one dimensional team, spread the defense out, slant passes, something, they didnt even try to get the defense guessing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They put Peterson at kick-off receiving to give him some ability to get "running"...that makes sense to me. And...seeing that chester taylor has done well, he deserves some playing time too... maybe mix it up a litle more than they have, sure...understand your point there.

Slant passes work well when the defense is spread..no question there, but as has been predicted, putting 7 - 8 men in the box defensively takes away lots of those little quick passes. And, with a receiving corp that is extremely limited in their abilities to get separation, there is not much to work with on this venue.

Again, our team is quite one dimensional right now..no receiving corps regardless of distance. As soon as they shut down a running game (it's been better today than last week) there is not much left. What do you expect a coach to do when there isn't much for options player-wise?

Now...as the game continues, we have more penalties, another safety, frustration, and a defense that has spent an awfully long time on the field. Those things don't add up to wins...

Give Childress a chance...it's only season 2, we've seen improvements in many areas, but we still need some players to allow things like the offense to open up more. Another year and a few good players picked up and this whole team would have a different look altogether...

your best teams (like New England and Dallas currently) have options galore...they have the options to utilize them since someone is always going to be open. Leave Moss in a 1-1, and he'll beat you...double team him, and someone will find the weakness.

Simple stuff that is not a coaches fault.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the last 34 seconds of regulation was coaching.

Denvers on their heels.

Wind is at our back.

Great kicker.

All we need is a couple 15 yard pass completions to at least attempt to win.

What do we get? A miserable attempt to run the clock out, and hope to win in OT?

You see where that theory got us?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VMS,

it isnt all coaching, but alot of it is. After the San Francisco game, a good coach would have known to be prepared for dealing with 8 or 9 in the box anytime AP is in the backfield....yet, rather than spread out the d with 3-4 wideouts/slot receivers and dink/dunk down the field to get them out of that...they continue to run. that is what separates the good coaches(Parcells, Gibbs, Belicheck, etc.) from the avg coaches...the ability to adjust as often as necessary and tailor a gameplan weekly that, based upon his players strengths, and an opponents strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies, gives them the best chance to win. Word on the street about Childress when he took this job, was that Andy Reid actually called the plays when Childress was the OC for Philly....it would appear that those people were right...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't have said it better myself Tadster. I guess that was my point I was trying to get across. All teams have weaknesses and it is the coaches responsibility to adjust his play calling to overcome whatever the other team throws at them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many of you are coaches in reality out there? Do you know the ins and outs of EVERY player on the vikings? Do you know what the strategy is? Do you know more than Childress does?

I certainly will NEVER make that comment, nor will I play arm-chair coach either.

I do know enough from my own coaching experience that when there isn't much to draw from (again and you all would have to agree with this receiving and a young quarterback) when you have two rock solid runners, and very little more to work with, that play calling isn't so easy and can only be "mixed up" so much. I would bet my life that Childress has enough knowledge of the game...more than any one of us, to call plays that will work for the team....and the plan for the game is tailored to each week. Is it predictable?...yes...They have nothing outside of a running game, so it's easy to defend. but when you don't have anything to fall back on, what do you expect?!!..there is nothing to rely upon to "mix up" the play calling.

You all get mad at poor play...in 95% of those situations, it has nothing...ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the play called...it has to do with PROPER EXECUTION by the players on the field.

Think about it... Where does this team lack? Defensive Backfield (players), Receiving corps (players), an experienced QB that can read/audible out (player). At this point in time, we have little to work with....That is not Childress' fault...if you think those things are not on his radar you're out of your mind... He's building a team...it takes time...give him some slack...he's learning too (he has been out-coached as well and I will not argue with anyone there who believes that..it doesn't make him stupid)...you cannot expect him to build a rock solid team in one year...or even two for that matter.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VMS: It is definitly coaching with a small percent of execution. This Vikings team makes no adjustments on the fly, HECK, the coaches do not even make needed adjustments during halftime. When they do get around to making them it is in the 4th Qtr., and it IS TOO LATE!!!!

Coaches and players keep stating that football is a business, and, should your principle decision maker for your business fail on 60% of his decisions, what do you think should be done?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can beat a dead horse here, the ONLY problem on this team is lack of execution with the QB. I'm talking season long. A 10-6, 11-5 team with a decent one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do I think? I think all of you who continue to bash Childress need to step into his shoes to see what he has to work with....personnel-wise, there is not much, and when you don't have many weapons do work with, you are extremely limited in what you can do.

It would be like hunting grizzly bear with a 6 inch skinning knife, because the rifle doesn't shoot straight, the arrows lack points and shotgun has no shells...

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No recievers? No QB? Was anybody watching the fourth quarter? The Vikes do have some guys to throw to (Not williamson). They do have a quarterback that can play when there is urgency. I think alot of that flatness and lack of preparationi falls on the coach. I know that he will be back here next year, that doesn't mean we have to like him, I think that he's as likeable as herpes. Remember, when he took this job, we were the team closest to getting to the superbowl, where are we now and where is Green Bay? How can you win 5 in a row and then come out the last two games flat? I knew that they weren't going to go far but I didn't think we'd see them revert back to the first half of the season. I would never complain about losing, but with Childress it seems that we are gettng boring and bad football more often than not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So continue to dislike him...he knows what he has to work with...you don't. Sure..we saw a team come alive, but that falls squarely on the shoulders of the players...they got a break, they made a few big plays at a time that was needed. Were they flat throughout? You bet.....that does not fall back on play calling...it's execution of those plays....

I'm done for now...you all can continue to point fingers all you want...but just for the sake of it, point at something...imagine it is childress... Seriously...try this...

Now...count how many fingers point back at you....

Play arm chair all you want...then keep in mind that if you think you can do better, go and apply for a head coaching job...be sure to bring your credentials of which remote control button you are best at using, and which hand holds the beer...

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

C'mon dude. The guy has known for 3 weeks now that teams are going too cram 8 or 9 guys in the box too stop the run. Any offensive coach worth his salt can take even an average reciever core and create matchups and get the ball moving when you know what the defense will be doing. And yet what do we see? Chilly constantly running tight sets. Are you going too tell me thats the best way too combat 8 and 9 man fronts? Can you make it any easier on the defense? And once in a while they run the ball out of a 3 reciever set, and oh my it goes for 9 yards, imagine that. And then we dont see it for another quarter. Spread the field and give the kid some room too run. Spread the field, it makes it easier for Jackson too see where the blitzer is coming from and hit the hot route behind it. Its much easier for a QB too read the blitz if there are only 7 guys in the box rather than 9 guys. Oh yeah, and logic says it might be easier too run against 7 sometimes too. They actually had done this alot during the win streak. What we've seen the last 3 weeks is a total reversion too the crap we saw early in the season in losses too teams like the lions and chiefs. Why? I dont understand it? You don't cram tight sets in all the time and let the defense dictate whats going on! You spread things out and start dicating what goes on yourself! Keep the defense on their heels. I mean these tight sets all game you dont even make the defense think!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VMS you are not the only one on here with coaching experience, there is no comparison between the NFL and local High School or College. Maybe if Childress was teaching a class of 9th graders for 40+ hours a week, and tryng to coach the Vikings, I'd be a little more understanding. The NFL is not high school or even college. These people get paid a lot of money to produce winners, or at least entertainment. I don't think that we are a very competitive or improving team. To me, that is just as much to do with coaching. We have 7 players going to the probowl. Thats plenty, not to mention a few that could have made it. If I coached High School football for 100 years, I would make the same as the minimum salaried player makes in 1 year. All I want to know is where have the improvements come since Tice left? I am well aware of the fact that it takes time for players to buy into a system and for a coach to get things established. But, I think some improvement should be warranted. The way they ended the season was really sad. No fire from the players or coaching staff. Maybe they were ready to collect their paychecks and call it a year.

The last two weeks we got one good quarter out of 8. How on earth do you just roll over when the playoffs are yours for the taking. If they would just put up a fight I think we would agree, but to go out and produce nothing, we should expect more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amen! When you have the best tandem of RB's in the league and you have defenses selling out that hard too stop them you don't need Manning, Harrison, and Wayne too pass the football. I'll give you today without the Taylor fumble and Williamson catching the ball the outcome might have been different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boys, I fall far more in Steve's camp on this one...give Childress more of a chance. We have a developing quarterback, that is something that's very clear. We might have the worst WR corps in the league, definitely bottom 5. What tools has he been able to work with? Rather than reach with the #5 overall pick to address our biggest need, he took highest value, and took a great wide-out in the 2nd, once again getting value. Where is the WR quick fix that Childress missed that could have saved us all? It hasn't existed. So he works with what he has. Tarvaris is developing, but clearly has a ways to go, that's why against 8-9 in the box he hasn't excelled. THIS ISN'T A COACHING PROBLEM FOLKS. It's execution plain and simple. A coach is responsible for designing a system, and teaching it to players, they have to implement it. I don't think Childress is a top coach in the NFL, but in my opinion, the genius of people like Belichick, Gibbs and Parcells is WAY over-blown. Does anyone remember how the Browns did with Belichick at the helm? How the Cowboys are now serious contenders after Parcells was gone, and that he hasn't produced a consistent winner since the Giants? Or how everyone laughed at Gibbs when he came back to the league and the Redskins looked like high schoolers because he was too old to be coaching again? The parity in the NFL is incredible, and the reason a team like the Patriots can go 16-0 and establish a true dynasty is because the players believe in not only the coaching, but in the system, and most importantly in each other. That's why Moss is succeeding in NE, because of the talent around him and because on that team, the players don't allow each other to execute poorly. How did he do without that in Oakland?

Are we really crying for Tice to be back? Seriously guys, that truly is laughable...Steve is recognizing what far too many NFL fans can't, that the problem isn't coaching 95% of the time, it's the players...do you really think Belichick knows some secret things about NFL football that Childress doesn't? You can have the greatest game plan in the world, and if the players don't execute, or in the case of the Vikes don't have the talent at some positions to execute, nothing will come of it. This is true from Pee-Wee football to the NFL, and the reason VMS is making a coaching reference. 2 all-star running backs mean squat if your QB can't keep a defense honest. Your QB will be average to terrible if you have WR's like we do.

The worst part is there is no quick fix in the NFL, besides the draft. This team is going to take more time fellas...But at least there is hope, players are buying into Childress's system, guys are getting more comfortable in it. Tarvaris is developing, and with another wide-out or two, he might be able to make more plays. When a team fails in the NFL, the answer has become: "fire the coach" That's the last thing this team needs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but when a defense tips its hand that hard and sells out that hard too stop a running game you don't need a pro bowl QB and WR's too get a passing game going. Do i expect 300 yards and 4 TD's? No, i've been in the camp saying Jackson needs time too develop. Do I expect Childress too get Jackson too throw for those numbers? No. But when a defense is doing what they have been doing for 4 weeks, You as an offensive coach know this, know the next team will follow this blueprint, you have got to be able too plan something up that at the outset of the game that gets the defense guessing some. Start in a 4 reciever set and run the ball. Throw more screens, does anything else combat the blitz more than this and yet we dont see any of it, once a game maybe. Just get the defense too back off a bit. 1st quarter every week. 1st down. Tight set. 8 guys in the box. Run Peterson at it for no gain. You cannot say that this hasnt been the case and you cannot tell me that this doesnt play right into the defensive gameplan we've seen now for 4 weeks straight. I'm just asking too shake things up a bit. I'm not asking for miracles. Just shake it up and at least attempt too get the defense too back some guys off of ya. There isnt even attempt too do this, that is what is the problem. Even the play by play guys are saying its predictable. The one game they even pointed out that you could tell just by how far back off the line of scrimmage the RB was, you could tell if it was a run or pass. My god if the play by play guys catch this what do you think the defensive coordinators are finding in a weeks worth of film. MIX THINGS UP!!!! ITS TOO PREDICTABLE!!! Its as big of a problem as talent. No players can execute when the defense knows what you are doing just as fast as you do!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walleyegator,

I dont think anyone is saying dont give Childress a chance, but for you to say the problem isnt coaching 95% of the time is just not correct. When Bill Walsh was in San Fran, Joe Montana was coming off a down year for him(still probably better than most). Walsh and his assistants analyzed films and figured out a couple of routes where Montana threw the majority of his interceptions...they eliminated those routes...small tweak, but great coaching...he had one of his best years the next season. These coaches watch film 50-60 hours per week, and have a very good idea what teams are going to do in certain situations in certain formations, etc. As predictable as the Vikings are on offense, its no wonder they havent been able to run the ball as well down the stretch...no imagination on offense at all. You have to keep a defense off balance.

Another example is Green Bay. When they blasted the Vikes at Lambeau, they spread the D out and ran wide, knowing our ends dont contain all that well and that the LB's dont run very well...again, small adjustment, but look how bad they made the #1 run defense look. Then, late in the game, if you recall(I couldnt watch a whole lot...painful), they ran the ball up the middle for some big gainers...they had the Vikes d looking like deer in the headlights....you will never convince me it doesnt have alot to do with coaching...

I agree the Vikes dont have the best receiving corps, but it isnt as bad as some make it out to be. Jackson looked pretty good yesterday in the 2nd half, and with more experience, could be pretty good. But better coaching would certainly help him out. Remember the kind of season Culpepper had when Linehan was working with him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But...let us not forget that in fast, pressure situations, a defense cannot make quick adjustments and in the game yesterday, they were in a prevent defense too...meaning there are gaps all over the place...easy pickings if the line holds up long enough to get a receiver in a pocket. After seeing many teams use a prevent defense against a hurry-up offense, big gains are made. The defense doesn't stunt anywhere near as much as they do when there is time taken by the offense to call a play.

With San Francisco, as you mentioned Tad, look at what they had for players as well...much more than what we have here...oh...and if you went back and looked at film too, you'd probably see that they ran a pretty tight offense too...the basic design of the west-coast offense. And...wouldn't you know it...that is what minnesota is running as well...

People have to realize that certain offensive schemes require a certain setup to work...west coast offense is designed to be short, compact and quick. When parts are missing from that scheme (receivers), spreading the defense out only does one thing...it makes gaps bigger, but with a running game only, the defense will still stack the middle, and larger gaps means extra men defensively in the gap to defend the run. If we had a better passing threat, spreading the defense works well.. That is why we saw so many teams do it to us when we were on defense...they had a passing threat much stronger than ours, which only enhances the ability to run the ball and open up play-action more. We just don't have that.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Planning is the responibility of the coaching staff, execution is the responsibility of the personnel assigned.

Who chooses the personnel that execute the plan?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve,

I agree with you that the Niners had more speed at receiver, but the Vikes receivers arent that bad(except for Williamson). Also, precise route running makes up for lack of speed...some of the fastest guys are poor route runners...Randy Moss was never a precise route runner when with the vikes...but Cris Carter was...he didnt have that 3rd gear that Moss does...always had more catches than Moss...not the big gainers, but chain movers. Kleinsasser, Shiancoe, Allison didnt get utilized in the passing game near enough, IMO....our tight ends rarely get utilized, and they all have good hands...

Further, if the personnel you have doesnt fit the scheme, then until you have the personnel that fits your scheme, run the scheme that best utilizes your players strengths...

That is what really separates the great coaches from the good or average coaches...

we will probably just have to agree to disagree on this one Steve...

Happy New Year!

TK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want too see the coaches just try too mix things up and make things less predictable. You have too at least try. If you don't try you play into the hands of the defense and you don't even make them think. Can you tell me that spreading the defense out doesnt make it easier for the QB too see where the pressure is coming from? And does that not make it easier for a young QB too decide where too go with the ball? How many of us are thinking this as the redskins game goes on? And then Madden chimes in and even says, if the skins are going too play that way you have no choice but too try and pass them out of it. You have got too try! But they didnt. They just kept playing right into the defenses hands. No one is calling for a no-huddle spread attack. My god what is so hard with mixing it up a little? I know what you are saying VMS. No they dont have the ideal weapons to do it. But when your in a position too get into the playoffs you do what you got too do. You at least give yourself the chance. And i dont think Childress did. I think he most certainly did for the most part in the win streak. I thought he had finally figured things out and was mixing things up nicely. And then we see a blueprint laid down by the 49ers and we see the MN offensive coaches show no ability too counter in any way, shape, or form. The vikings went from dictating on offense, too completely dictated to and showed no ability at all to adapt to what was going on.

The west coast is designed too be quick but its not designed too be compact. The main cog is the quick rythmic passing game built on yards after the catch. Bill Walsh brought in the west coast and it was anything but compact. Green Bay runs the west coast, anything but compact, very spread out and very much based on quick rythmic passing and yards after the catch. Andy Reid and the eagles, again spread out, quick and diverse. Andy Reid understands how too use his best weapon also. Reid gets the ball too westbrook in every way he can. Can Peterson be a Westbrook? Probably not quite that diverse but he catches the ball well enough too get the ball in the passing game a heck of a lot more than he does. For some reason Childress has decided not too or lacks the knowledge to use his biggest weapon in diverse ways. Again, lack of creativity is very evident and is not disputable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0