So the Vikings defense was ranked #9 entering tonight's game...

D_it_up · 10-26-2012, 10:54 PM

The only thing about this game that mattered to me was that Martin and Peterson , collectively scored 50 points for me this week.

Vrillon82 · 10-26-2012, 11:02 PM

Originally Posted by 4thqtrsaint

Rankings are a loaded gun... The difference between the number 1 ranked D in yds allowed vs the number 10 ranked D can be less than 40 yds a game... I don't care about rankings... Its all about matchups. Period.

Well that and some of the top defenses in the league is actually only ranked at the top because of their division. (Pittsburgh and Baltimore) is 2 teams that come to mind that when they face a good offense, they give up tons of points.

Danno · 10-27-2012, 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by 4thqtrsaint

Rankings are a loaded gun... The difference between the number 1 ranked D in yds allowed vs the number 10 ranked D can be less than 40 yds a game... I don't care about rankings... Its all about matchups. Period.

And scoring. Our best defensive series all year gave up 96 yards.

FinSaint · 10-27-2012, 10:19 AM

You can't make a direct comparison based on that performance, because the Vikes' defense actually had a good game even though the numbers might suggest otherwise.

The problem the Vikes' defense had was that their offense was complete crap the whole game through, which forced the Vikes' defense to be on the field way too much and for way too many snaps. The offense gave up the ball twice - well thrice, but the last INT was in the dying moments - both of which times it led to the Bucs having a short field on their offensive turn. The Vikes' defense did a good job forcing the Bucs to take some field goals, because they had some great starting field positions all game through thanks to Kluwe's horrible day at punting the ball. Also, they made some great halftime adjustments in defending the run. Martin (RB) was pretty much shut down in the second half after having had a stellar first half at running the ball and Blount didn't make an impact on his snaps either, although Martin did score a TD on that screen pass in the beginning of the second half.

Normally, the Vikes' defensive players tackle really well, but for some reason they were missing a lot of tackles against the Bucs, maybe the large amount of snaps they took had something to do with this, but in all honesty they were whiffing on tackles from the get go. Also, their secondary probably had the worst game they've had this season. After Cook hurt his arm and Jefferson replaced him, the Bucs took advantage of the mid-season acquisition and made some big pass plays on the left side of the field.

So the real difference between the Saints playing the Bucs and the Vikes playing them was that one of the teams had an actual offense that was taking some pressure of the defense and the other didn't.

Also, just to clear up one thing... the Vikes have a new defensive coordinator this year, and there have been some scheme changes because of it - most of them positive, but they are not on the 6th year of the same scheme.

CharityMike · 10-27-2012, 12:26 PM

Originally Posted by FinSaint

You can't make a direct comparison based on that performance, because the Vikes' defense actually had a good game even though the numbers might suggest otherwise.

The problem the Vikes' defense had was that their offense was complete crap the whole game through, which forced the Vikes' defense to be on the field way too much and for way too many snaps. The offense gave up the ball twice - well thrice, but the last INT was in the dying moments - both of which times it led to the Bucs having a short field on their offensive turn. The Vikes' defense did a good job forcing the Bucs to take some field goals, because they had some great starting field positions all game through thanks to Kluwe's horrible day at punting the ball. Also, they made some great halftime adjustments in defending the run. Martin (RB) was pretty much shut down in the second half after having had a stellar first half at running the ball and Blount didn't make an impact on his snaps either, although Martin did score a TD on that screen pass in the beginning of the second half.

Normally, the Vikes' defensive players tackle really well, but for some reason they were missing a lot of tackles against the Bucs, maybe the large amount of snaps they took had something to do with this, but in all honesty they were whiffing on tackles from the get go. Also, their secondary probably had the worst game they've had this season. After Cook hurt his arm and Jefferson replaced him, the Bucs took advantage of the mid-season acquisition and made some big pass plays on the left side of the field.

So the real difference between the Saints playing the Bucs and the Vikes playing them was that one of the teams had an actual offense that was taking some pressure of the defense and the other didn't.

Also, just to clear up one thing... the Vikes have a new defensive coordinator this year, and there have been some scheme changes because of it - most of them positive, but they are not on the 6th year of the same scheme.

I hear what you are saying but Larod Stevens had 100+ on them, the Martin gets 100+ on them. Maybe they are not as good as originally thought.

FinSaint · 10-27-2012, 01:14 PM

Originally Posted by CharityMike

I hear what you are saying but Larod Stevens had 100+ on them, the Martin gets 100+ on them. Maybe they are not as good as originally thought.

They've had some problems with gap control which has lead to some problems with the running defense, but that much can be expected when their MLB didn't play last season nor would've been their starting MLB even if he could've played and the other OLB is only on his second year - Greenway though is a stud, but even he missed some tackles against the Bucs.

I don't know how this year's Vikes' defense is evaluated to or expected to perform, but I can personally say that they look much better than they did last year even if Allen almost broke the sack record. It's mostly because of the secondary and the improvements they've made in that sector. They got rid of their safeties from last year and replaced them with Raymond (who was playing really well before he got injured), Samford, and the rookie Harrison Smith, who has been absolutely lights out for a rookie. Also, Cook had been playing really well after being essentially out of football for a year because of his legal problems last season. Winfield has been really good also, and he said that his new training schedule has allowed him to have a fresher body on Sunday which has translated into even more bone-crushing hits.

Honestly, they are a much better defense than what the Saints have, but their offense cannot even be compared to the Brees led powerhouse the Saints have - and that's mainly because a young QB like Ponder would need more weapons than just AP and Harvin in order to be more successful.

CharityMike · 10-27-2012, 01:27 PM

Believe me..I wasn't implying that our defense was better. It don't get much worse than what we have going on.

Tobias-Reiper · 10-27-2012, 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by FinSaint

You can't make a direct comparison based on that performance, because the Vikes' defense actually had a good game even though the numbers might suggest otherwise.

.. so, someone scores 38 on them, allow 160+ yards rushing, and they played well. Ok.

Also, just to clear up one thing... the Vikes have a new defensive coordinator this year, and there have been some scheme changes because of it - most of them positive, but they are not on the 6th year of the same scheme.

Yeah, like the Saints offense is Carmichael's, right? The system they are using is L. Frazier's system.

FinSaint · 10-27-2012, 06:50 PM

Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper

.. so, someone scores 38 on them, allow 160+ yards rushing, and they played well. Ok.

Did you watch the game? The points allowed do not reflect how the defense played as an unit in this game. They were forced to play too many snaps, given a short field to protect on numerous occasions, and were exploited by injury subs.

Would you say that the Bucs defense played well? They only allowed 17 points, so I guess they played pretty well? Of course, they did allow AP to run for 128 yards with only 15 carries while Martin ran for 135 yards with 29 carries... and that was against a Bucs' defense that averaged something like 75 allowed rushing yards per game if I remember correctly (I could be wrong, but I remember it being something like that before the Saints played them).

The difference was that the Vikes didn't have a passing offense to speak of, and that offense had a number of 3 and outs when the defense had just given the team another chance to comeback with a good defensive series. So, it's all argumentative when we are only looking at the stats, but my subjective view of the game was that while the Vikes' defense didn't have their best game of the season - they were far from being bad or the reason why the Vikes lost that game.

Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper

Yeah, like the Saints offense is Carmichael's, right? The system they are using is L. Frazier's system.

The Vikes have a new defensive coordinator and a new defensive line coach, so I do think that's a considerable turn over from last year, especially when people largely consider the Vikes' D front 4 to be their major strength.

Naturally, they haven't blown up the system they had in place, because that would've been crazy as the defense wasn't bad to begin with. Alan Williams (the new DC) worked with Frazier in Indianapolis in 2005-6 with the defensive secondary, so it would only be logical that they have similar tendencies to begin with if they were able to work together and were willing to do it once again. But he began his NFL coaching career in Tampa under Dungy, so you can pretty much trace his pedigree back to Tampa 2. And that is a major difference between the defensive philosophies between Frazier - who developed his secondary coaching skills in Philadelphia, Cincinnati and later in Indianapolis under Dungy - and Williams. But there is another significant difference in that Williams is now the defensive play-caller and not Frazier, and he definitely has his own playbook to call those plays from and his own tendencies when it comes to different situations.

As someone who has followed the Vikes for number of years, never even missing a single preseason game - I can tell you that I've seen a number changes implemented this year that are a deviation from what Frazier has been doing the last couple of years, but that is naturally my own subjective view which I admit is not 100% scientific in nature.

So to answer your statement... no, I do not think they are running Frazier's system, at least in the sense that Frazier's system wasn't really completely his to begin with as he himself built on what was already in place when he came to Minnesota. But I do admit that the changes are not as big as with the Saints' defense moving from GW's scheme to Spags' - I was just not agreeing with your statement that the Vikes are on their 6th year with the current system, because that statement is false as I have tried to explain. But, ultimately, I guess that as well depends on the definition we give to the term "defensive system."

Tobias-Reiper · 10-27-2012, 11:22 PM

Originally Posted by FinSaint

Did you watch the game? The points allowed do not reflect how the defense played as an unit in this game. They were forced to play too many snaps, given a short field to protect on numerous occasions, and were exploited by injury subs.

So again, let me get this straight: a defense allows 38 points, get run over, but it doesn't reflect how the defense played. OK.

I watched the game. They got manhandled from the get-go.

10-26-2012, 10:54 PM	#31
D_it_up Faqda Falcons Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Ruston, Louisiana Posts: 3,465 Blog Entries: 3	Re: So the Vikings defense was ranked #9 entering tonight's game... The only thing about this game that mattered to me was that Martin and Peterson , collectively scored 50 points for me this week.

10-26-2012, 11:02 PM	#32
Vrillon82 1000 Posts + Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 1,127	Re: So the Vikings defense was ranked #9 entering tonight's game... Originally Posted by 4thqtrsaint Rankings are a loaded gun... The difference between the number 1 ranked D in yds allowed vs the number 10 ranked D can be less than 40 yds a game... I don't care about rankings... Its all about matchups. Period. Well that and some of the top defenses in the league is actually only ranked at the top because of their division. (Pittsburgh and Baltimore) is 2 teams that come to mind that when they face a good offense, they give up tons of points.
Vrillon82 1000 Posts + Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 1,127

10-27-2012, 09:25 AM	#33
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,720	Re: So the Vikings defense was ranked #9 entering tonight's game... Originally Posted by 4thqtrsaint Rankings are a loaded gun... The difference between the number 1 ranked D in yds allowed vs the number 10 ranked D can be less than 40 yds a game... I don't care about rankings... Its all about matchups. Period. And scoring. Our best defensive series all year gave up 96 yards. SaintsBro and AlaskaSaints like this.

10-27-2012, 10:19 AM	#34
FinSaint Site Donor 2015 Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Finland... formerly Southern Virginia Posts: 4,961	Re: So the Vikings defense was ranked #9 entering tonight's game... You can't make a direct comparison based on that performance, because the Vikes' defense actually had a good game even though the numbers might suggest otherwise. The problem the Vikes' defense had was that their offense was complete crap the whole game through, which forced the Vikes' defense to be on the field way too much and for way too many snaps. The offense gave up the ball twice - well thrice, but the last INT was in the dying moments - both of which times it led to the Bucs having a short field on their offensive turn. The Vikes' defense did a good job forcing the Bucs to take some field goals, because they had some great starting field positions all game through thanks to Kluwe's horrible day at punting the ball. Also, they made some great halftime adjustments in defending the run. Martin (RB) was pretty much shut down in the second half after having had a stellar first half at running the ball and Blount didn't make an impact on his snaps either, although Martin did score a TD on that screen pass in the beginning of the second half. Normally, the Vikes' defensive players tackle really well, but for some reason they were missing a lot of tackles against the Bucs, maybe the large amount of snaps they took had something to do with this, but in all honesty they were whiffing on tackles from the get go. Also, their secondary probably had the worst game they've had this season. After Cook hurt his arm and Jefferson replaced him, the Bucs took advantage of the mid-season acquisition and made some big pass plays on the left side of the field. So the real difference between the Saints playing the Bucs and the Vikes playing them was that one of the teams had an actual offense that was taking some pressure of the defense and the other didn't. Also, just to clear up one thing... the Vikes have a new defensive coordinator this year, and there have been some scheme changes because of it - most of them positive, but they are not on the 6th year of the same scheme.
	"I'm not bashing people, I'm bashing their opinions because in my opinion their opinion is wrong" - Danno

10-27-2012, 12:26 PM	#35
CharityMike Site Donor 2018 Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Mid City, New Orleans Posts: 3,556	Re: So the Vikings defense was ranked #9 entering tonight's game... Originally Posted by FinSaint You can't make a direct comparison based on that performance, because the Vikes' defense actually had a good game even though the numbers might suggest otherwise. The problem the Vikes' defense had was that their offense was complete crap the whole game through, which forced the Vikes' defense to be on the field way too much and for way too many snaps. The offense gave up the ball twice - well thrice, but the last INT was in the dying moments - both of which times it led to the Bucs having a short field on their offensive turn. The Vikes' defense did a good job forcing the Bucs to take some field goals, because they had some great starting field positions all game through thanks to Kluwe's horrible day at punting the ball. Also, they made some great halftime adjustments in defending the run. Martin (RB) was pretty much shut down in the second half after having had a stellar first half at running the ball and Blount didn't make an impact on his snaps either, although Martin did score a TD on that screen pass in the beginning of the second half. Normally, the Vikes' defensive players tackle really well, but for some reason they were missing a lot of tackles against the Bucs, maybe the large amount of snaps they took had something to do with this, but in all honesty they were whiffing on tackles from the get go. Also, their secondary probably had the worst game they've had this season. After Cook hurt his arm and Jefferson replaced him, the Bucs took advantage of the mid-season acquisition and made some big pass plays on the left side of the field. So the real difference between the Saints playing the Bucs and the Vikes playing them was that one of the teams had an actual offense that was taking some pressure of the defense and the other didn't. Also, just to clear up one thing... the Vikes have a new defensive coordinator this year, and there have been some scheme changes because of it - most of them positive, but they are not on the 6th year of the same scheme. I hear what you are saying but Larod Stevens had 100+ on them, the Martin gets 100+ on them. Maybe they are not as good as originally thought.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

10-27-2012, 01:14 PM	#36
FinSaint Site Donor 2015 Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Finland... formerly Southern Virginia Posts: 4,961	Re: So the Vikings defense was ranked #9 entering tonight's game... Originally Posted by CharityMike I hear what you are saying but Larod Stevens had 100+ on them, the Martin gets 100+ on them. Maybe they are not as good as originally thought. They've had some problems with gap control which has lead to some problems with the running defense, but that much can be expected when their MLB didn't play last season nor would've been their starting MLB even if he could've played and the other OLB is only on his second year - Greenway though is a stud, but even he missed some tackles against the Bucs. I don't know how this year's Vikes' defense is evaluated to or expected to perform, but I can personally say that they look much better than they did last year even if Allen almost broke the sack record. It's mostly because of the secondary and the improvements they've made in that sector. They got rid of their safeties from last year and replaced them with Raymond (who was playing really well before he got injured), Samford, and the rookie Harrison Smith, who has been absolutely lights out for a rookie. Also, Cook had been playing really well after being essentially out of football for a year because of his legal problems last season. Winfield has been really good also, and he said that his new training schedule has allowed him to have a fresher body on Sunday which has translated into even more bone-crushing hits. Honestly, they are a much better defense than what the Saints have, but their offense cannot even be compared to the Brees led powerhouse the Saints have - and that's mainly because a young QB like Ponder would need more weapons than just AP and Harvin in order to be more successful.
	"I'm not bashing people, I'm bashing their opinions because in my opinion their opinion is wrong" - Danno

10-27-2012, 01:27 PM	#37
CharityMike Site Donor 2018 Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Mid City, New Orleans Posts: 3,556	Re: So the Vikings defense was ranked #9 entering tonight's game... Believe me..I wasn't implying that our defense was better. It don't get much worse than what we have going on.

10-27-2012, 04:32 PM	#38
Tobias-Reiper Merces Letifer Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 4,161	Re: So the Vikings defense was ranked #9 entering tonight's game... Originally Posted by FinSaint You can't make a direct comparison based on that performance, because the Vikes' defense actually had a good game even though the numbers might suggest otherwise. .. so, someone scores 38 on them, allow 160+ yards rushing, and they played well. Ok. Also, just to clear up one thing... the Vikes have a new defensive coordinator this year, and there have been some scheme changes because of it - most of them positive, but they are not on the 6th year of the same scheme. Yeah, like the Saints offense is Carmichael's, right? The system they are using is L. Frazier's system.

10-27-2012, 06:50 PM	#39
FinSaint Site Donor 2015 Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Finland... formerly Southern Virginia Posts: 4,961	Re: So the Vikings defense was ranked #9 entering tonight's game... Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper .. so, someone scores 38 on them, allow 160+ yards rushing, and they played well. Ok. Did you watch the game? The points allowed do not reflect how the defense played as an unit in this game. They were forced to play too many snaps, given a short field to protect on numerous occasions, and were exploited by injury subs. Would you say that the Bucs defense played well? They only allowed 17 points, so I guess they played pretty well? Of course, they did allow AP to run for 128 yards with only 15 carries while Martin ran for 135 yards with 29 carries... and that was against a Bucs' defense that averaged something like 75 allowed rushing yards per game if I remember correctly (I could be wrong, but I remember it being something like that before the Saints played them). The difference was that the Vikes didn't have a passing offense to speak of, and that offense had a number of 3 and outs when the defense had just given the team another chance to comeback with a good defensive series. So, it's all argumentative when we are only looking at the stats, but my subjective view of the game was that while the Vikes' defense didn't have their best game of the season - they were far from being bad or the reason why the Vikes lost that game. Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper Yeah, like the Saints offense is Carmichael's, right? The system they are using is L. Frazier's system. The Vikes have a new defensive coordinator and a new defensive line coach, so I do think that's a considerable turn over from last year, especially when people largely consider the Vikes' D front 4 to be their major strength. Naturally, they haven't blown up the system they had in place, because that would've been crazy as the defense wasn't bad to begin with. Alan Williams (the new DC) worked with Frazier in Indianapolis in 2005-6 with the defensive secondary, so it would only be logical that they have similar tendencies to begin with if they were able to work together and were willing to do it once again. But he began his NFL coaching career in Tampa under Dungy, so you can pretty much trace his pedigree back to Tampa 2. And that is a major difference between the defensive philosophies between Frazier - who developed his secondary coaching skills in Philadelphia, Cincinnati and later in Indianapolis under Dungy - and Williams. But there is another significant difference in that Williams is now the defensive play-caller and not Frazier, and he definitely has his own playbook to call those plays from and his own tendencies when it comes to different situations. As someone who has followed the Vikes for number of years, never even missing a single preseason game - I can tell you that I've seen a number changes implemented this year that are a deviation from what Frazier has been doing the last couple of years, but that is naturally my own subjective view which I admit is not 100% scientific in nature. So to answer your statement... no, I do not think they are running Frazier's system, at least in the sense that Frazier's system wasn't really completely his to begin with as he himself built on what was already in place when he came to Minnesota. But I do admit that the changes are not as big as with the Saints' defense moving from GW's scheme to Spags' - I was just not agreeing with your statement that the Vikes are on their 6th year with the current system, because that statement is false as I have tried to explain. But, ultimately, I guess that as well depends on the definition we give to the term "defensive system."
	"I'm not bashing people, I'm bashing their opinions because in my opinion their opinion is wrong" - Danno

10-27-2012, 11:22 PM	#40
Tobias-Reiper Merces Letifer Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 4,161	Re: So the Vikings defense was ranked #9 entering tonight's game... Originally Posted by FinSaint Did you watch the game? The points allowed do not reflect how the defense played as an unit in this game. They were forced to play too many snaps, given a short field to protect on numerous occasions, and were exploited by injury subs. So again, let me get this straight: a defense allows 38 points, get run over, but it doesn't reflect how the defense played. OK. I watched the game. They got manhandled from the get-go.

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/52298-so-vikings-defense-ranked-9-entering-tonights-game.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
So the Vikings defense was ranked #9 entering tonight's game...	This thread	Refback	10-26-2012 12:17 AM	1