New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com

New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com (https://blackandgold.com/community/)

- Saints (https://blackandgold.com/saints/)

- - Vikings -3.5 (https://blackandgold.com/saints/86645-vikings-3-5-a.html)

Re: Vikings -3.5

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL (Post 787674)

You must mean Crawley. Lattimore played in the first Vikings game.

We can agree that Harris was Mr. "Coverage Bust".

SFIAH

Hmm... I guess so, then. I thought I remember Crawley and Lattimore both being injured for that game. Just about anybody is better than Harris, though.

Re: Vikings -3.5

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry from MS (Post 787681)

Brees won't have time to go deep, so Vikes should stack the box & prolly go single high safety. Rhodes 1-on-1 vs MThomas w/safety cheating wherever Ginn is. We should get the ball quick on perimeter with MI/AK/TGJ. I think MT+Brees wins vs Rhodes & Kamara/Ingram on a LB'er in coverage is just sick. If we set-up the run with the pass instead of vice versa, your gonna see a gassed Vikes DLine in 4th Qtr IF we don't turn it over & get enough 1st downs through the air to own the clock.

We ain't getting chunk plays this game. "Slow is smooth, smooth is fast" should be the mantra. Coleman/Snead/Hill needs to step up big in this one if Coleman would quit holding the ball like a loaf of bread.

Or I could be 105% wrong. Us weathermen like to hedge our bets...

I don't disagree with anything you said. But these things were all seemingly the way to beat them the first time, and it did not appear the Vikings had any trouble sticking with Kamara. I'm not saying it can't or won't be different this time, but my responses are geared towards the argument people are making that this team is totally different, and we should expect a different result because of that. I'm just not certain this team is as different as people think it is.

The Saints could not block in that game. They didn't have Armstead, and Ramczyk was playing his first game. So the tackle situation should be better this time around. But now Peat is hurt. Defensively, the Saints had no push all game long. If that happens again, it obviously won't matter who's playing QB for the Vikings.

But, it's all speculation anyway.

Re: Vikings -3.5

Quote:

Originally Posted by burningmetal (Post 787747)

Hmm... I guess so, then. I thought I remember Crawley and Lattimore both being injured for that game. Just about anybody is better than Harris, though.

Here's a link to the snap counts for the game. Lattimore was in on 61 of 65 snaps:

https://www.pro-football-reference.c...p_counts::none

And Crawley seems to have been a healthy scratch for the game. The injury report for that game is here:

http://www.nfl.com/injuries?week=1

SFIAH

Re: Vikings -3.5

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL (Post 787773)

And Crawley seems to have been a healthy scratch for the game.

SFIAH

That was baffling for me. Especially considering he had a strong camp/preseason. Devante' was absolutely lit up on those crossing routes.

Also worth noting Willie Snead was suspended for this game. Maybe, just maybe he'll show up on Sunday.