Ruminations on the Vikings Game

[Ozzy]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/PFF_Louie/status/1201897436391911425[/tweet]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/benbbaldwin/status/1201898394970710016[/tweet]

Wilson has the highest degree of difficulty in the league, but he always finds a way.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/hawkblogger/status/1201955446837268480[/tweet]

Super impressive.

I wish Seattle would bring back elements of a quick passing game to match the deep vertical stuff, at least at times like we saw in the Pittsburg game. The fact that Russell is so efficient while having one of the highest degree of difficulties on the majority of his throws is something that doesn't get mentioned enough.

 

[HawkStrong]

Did you just quote Ben Baldwin in your initial post, and in a serious fashion?

Surprised to see you posting here, after getting run out of town for your Wilson take.

 

[Fade]

Did you just quote Ben Baldwin in your initial post, and in a serious fashion?

Yeah, because I know how much you love him.

Pete Carroll is a great coach. I am in awe of the culture he builds, and how he fosters the development of young players. But he is also not good at 4th down decision making, and time management. And I will point these things out from time to time.

Some people here really struggle deciphering a real critique from hate. There is a difference. I don't agree with everything that Ben Baldwin tweets, I actually disagree with a lot of it, but I am in lockstep with him and many others on 4th down philosophy. The analytics people are just now starting to take over the sport. The Ravens are the ones that are going to kick in the door permanently. Which means punting at midfield on 4th and a short 1 will be a thing of the past in the next few years, it pretty much is now for that matter.

Coaches not long ago used to get fired for going for it on 4th down. They are now going to start getting fired for not going for it on 4th down.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/05/upshot/4th-down-when-to-go-for-it-and-why.html?_r=0
This will be the new standard, or thereabouts in a couple of seasons as analytics become more embedded in the sport.

Teams are not expanding their analytic departments for the fun of it. Tangible results are happening on the field, and the emphasis is only becoming greater.

 

[jammerhawk]

I don't know about legitimate concern however the coaches need to work a bit with him so his desire to make something more out of a play than what is there reasonably doesn't result in him exposing the ball to being stripped or knocked out of his possession. He has had a few knocked out of his hands which may be the result of his inexperience with Pro level CBs or S.

 

[Fade]

I wish Seattle would bring back elements of a quick passing game to match the deep vertical stuff, at least at times like we saw in the Pittsburgh game. The fact that Russell is so efficient while having one of the highest degree of difficulties on the majority of his throws is something that doesn't get mentioned enough.

[/quote]

Absolutely.

Pete was seeing how effective the run game was going in the game, and decided to ride that to victory. Minny's gameplan was to take away the deep ball as they played deep 2 high most of the night, so Seattle responded by pounding the rock against a softer box. The WRs had the flu too, so knowing that it makes even more sense.

This was an amazing result as teams going forward know that they can't play 2-High and get away with it, or Seattle will cram it down there throats. Teams are going to have to bring a safety down, and the play-pass will then open up. Zimmer gambled and thought his front 7 could stop the run, and stay in 2 high shell, having his cake and eating it to. He was wrong.

The short passing game is something Pete will always de-emphasize, only to be used at certain moments. I agree though if they implemented it along with everything else they do it would make them even harder to stop.

They just need to get Lockett healthy, and Josh Gordon integrated more into the offense and they will be a juggernaut. They already are the #1 Passing DVOA team, but they can get so much better.

 

[Polk738]

I wish Seattle would bring back elements of a quick passing game to match the deep vertical stuff, at least at times like we saw in the Pittsburgh game. The fact that Russell is so efficient while having one of the highest degree of difficulties on the majority of his throws is something that doesn't get mentioned enough.

Absolutely.

Pete was seeing how effective the run game was going in the game, and decided to ride that to victory. Minny's gameplan was to take away the deep ball as they played deep 2 high most of the night, so Seattle responded by pounding the rock against a softer box. The WRs had the flu too, so knowing that it makes even more sense.

This was an amazing result as teams going forward know that they can't play 2-High and get away with it, or Seattle will cram it down there throats. Teams are going to have to bring a safety down, and the play-pass will then open up. Zimmer gambled and thought his front 7 could stop the run, and stay in 2 high shell, having his cake and eating it to. He was wrong.

The short passing game is something Pete will always de-emphasize, only to be used at certain moments. I agree though if they implemented it along with everything else they do it would make them even harder to stop.

They just need to get Lockett healthy, and Josh Gordon integrated more into the offense and they will be a juggernaut. They already are the #1 Passing DVOA team, but they can get so much better.[/quote]


I found that interesting as well considering Seattle was running so many heavy formations with Fant yet Minny was still running two high safeties- I LOVED the 1, 2 punch of Carson and Penny and that was probably the best I've seen Penny run all season, I know he had more yards against Philly last week but his running between the tackles was what impressed me the most-I hope they stick to this formula the rest of the season.

 

[Chapow]

I definitely see your point on this guys, but contextually, the tweet is being made in the heat of the moment, mix the emotions with the math, and this is what results. It was a cowardly punt ultimately, with a high surrender index.

It continues to be an area that Pete gets wrong. It had a surrender index of 85% which is ridiculous. Everyone keeps defending Pete and says it's not a big deal which so far has been true. Except it's not a big deal until it is and it costs us a game. It's an easy fix though so maybe in higher leverage instances he gets it right.

Let me know when punting on 4th down from our own side of the field with 57 minutes remaining in the game costs us a game. Thanks :2thumbs:

Also, in regards to the "surrender index",

This project contains a Twitter bot that automatically tweets every time there is a punt in an NFL game. It tweets each punt's "Surrender Index" - a completely arbitrary metric created by SB Nation's Jon Bois to quantify how cowardly a punt is.

https://github.com/andrew-shackelford/Surrender-Index

You guys are literally using a completely arbitrary metric to try to legitimize your opinion that Pete is wrong, continues to be wrong, and is apparently a coward. Which is far more ridiculous than punting on 4th down from our own side of the field 3 minutes into the 1st quarter.

Well when almost every other coach in the league goes for it there because the numbers say you should then its a bad decision.

Do you have anything to support your assertion that almost every other coach in the league goes for it on 4th down on their own side of the field 3 minutes into the first quarter? You don't have to answer that. We both know you don't. I doubt half the coaches in the league go for it there, but I also doubt there's any way to prove it one way or the other.

I love Pete as much as anyone but this weird allegiance to every single decision he makes like he's infallible is strange.

It's also strange that some here immediately resort to comments like this when someone disagrees with a criticism of Pete. I seriously doubt there are more than a tiny handful of people that think Pete is infallible, and I'm sure as hell not one of them.

There are many other metrics that should its smarter to just go for it instead of gaining the potential 30 yards in field position. Points matter and you have a better chance of scoring more if you go for it. The risk outweighs the reward. Harbaugh in Baltimore talked about this in a recent interview and moving forward it will continue to be a situation where more and more teams do go for it.

That's great, and I get that things are changing in regards to the conventional wisdom on whether or not to go for it on 4th down. However, coaches are constantly faced with "damned if you do, damned if you don't" decisions. Pete chooses to punt it there, he gets criticized. Pete chooses to go for it there, he gets criticized. Even if the team converts the 4th down some would criticize taking the unnecessary risk of possibly giving the Vikings great field position for seemingly no reason on their very first drive of the game.

You said let you know when it costs us a game but that's not really true. if Pete does do this and it does costs us a game you won't admit and neither will every other Pete apologist on this subject.

No. It really is true. You let me know when punting on 4th down on our own side of the field with 57 minutes remaining in the game costs us a game and I'll eat the biggest plate of crow you've ever seen. And again, I'm not a Pete apologist. I simply disagree with you, Fade, and Baldwin on this particular criticism of this particular 4th down decision.

We get it Pete is perfect and if you don't agree you're not a true fan. This take is tiring.

I'd argue that the melodramatic fallacy you just resorted too is far more tiring.

Any thoughts on the "surrender index" and your citing of it to support your argument? Thought I'd ask since you ignored that part of my post and instead tried to create the fallacy that I'm some sort of blind Pete loyalist that believes everything he does is perfect and that he never makes any mistakes.

 

[Chapow]

Some people here really struggle deciphering a real critique from hate.

And some people here really struggle deciphering simply disagreeing with that critique from blind allegiance.

 

[xray]

DK had a great night but it can all be nullified with one fumble that could have cost us the game. He had the rep of bad hands coming into the league. It's just something he needs to concentrate on more.

Nice work Fade.

Yeah, DK's fumbling is rising from the "rookie jitters" stage to full blown "it's a legitimate concern" level.

:snack:

fumbling and some pass dropsy issues too . He's a rookie ; which is hard ; and he may have been hyped too much to start with . Some day he might be the monster we all wanted him to be . :0190l:

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

I found that interesting as well considering Seattle was running so many heavy formations with Fant yet Minny was still running two high safeties.........

Yeah even Booger saw it and predicted a big run by Carson before it happened. He said "light box, this will be a big run" and Carson ripped off 12 iirc.

 

[scutterhawk]

Kirk Cousins is such a joke. 0 - 8 on MNF. It looks like it too. He has the height, weight, throwing arm, beautiful spiral and all the prototype stuff. But if it's a big game, prime time game, against a big time opponent, playoffs or playoff atmosphere I would definitely not count on him.

That's not giving due credit to Russell Wilson & the Seahawks Defense, the Vikings aren't the only team that has fallen victim to Seattle's Monday Night win streak. :mrgreen:

 

[SanDiego49er]

Kirk Cousins is such a joke. 0 - 8 on MNF. It looks like it too. He has the height, weight, throwing arm, beautiful spiral and all the prototype stuff. But if it's a big game, prime time game, against a big time opponent, playoffs or playoff atmosphere I would definitely not count on him.

That's not giving due credit to Russell Wilson & the Seahawks Defense, the Vikings aren't the only team that has fallen victim to Seattle's Monday Night win streak. :mrgreen:

Sure the credit goes to the Seahawks and I give them that. But Cousins is just awful in big games, prime time games, games that matter, playoff atmosphere or actual playoffs. He is literally 0 - 8 on MNF. That's a joke. Every QB in the league is better than this. He must be 0 - Forever in big time games. I rarely ever see him win anything big. Sure your team is good and you won it. I can see that too. No doubt about it. But that doesn't change that Cousins chokes big time in big games. The perception is pretty much reality with him.

 

[Maulbert]

Kirk Cousins is such a joke. 0 - 8 on MNF. It looks like it too. He has the height, weight, throwing arm, beautiful spiral and all the prototype stuff. But if it's a big game, prime time game, against a big time opponent, playoffs or playoff atmosphere I would definitely not count on him.

That's not giving due credit to Russell Wilson & the Seahawks Defense, the Vikings aren't the only team that has fallen victim to Seattle's Monday Night win streak. :mrgreen:

Sure the credit goes to the Seahawks and I give them that. But Cousins is just awful in big games, prime time games, games that matter, playoff atmosphere or actual playoffs. He is literally 0 - 8 on MNF. That's a joke. Every QB in the league is better than this. He must be 0 - Forever in big time games. I rarely ever see him win anything big. Sure your team is good and you won it. I can see that too. No doubt about it. But that doesn't change that Cousins chokes big time in big games. The perception is pretty much reality with him.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/murphmedia_/status/1201718109868040193[/tweet]

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Cousins didn't choke as badly as his receivers, I thought. I'm seeing a lot of Vikings fans more pissed at Diggs.

 

[chris98251]

Cousins didn't choke as badly as his receivers, I thought. I'm seeing a lot of Vikings fans more pissed at Diggs.

The catchable drops killed a lot of drives late.

 

[olyfan63]

Kirk Cousins simply cannot allow 210+ rushing yards to an opponent, including nearly every crucial 3rd and 1, and be considered a good big-game quarterback. The worst of Cousins' performance was when he allowed a 29-yard trick play run out of 4th and 2 punt formation. Cousins also simply cannot allow Dalvin Cook to fumble and turn the ball over on a routine running play. To add injury to insult, Cousins' poor decision on the Dalvin Cook fumble play also led to Cook injuring his arm on that play and having Cook, his elite #1 running threat, be unavailable the rest of the game. Cousins has to understand he can't be a truly elite downfield passing threat without a homerun running threat like Cook. Cousins simply has step up his leadership to prevent disastrous plays like this!

Correction: Cousins' worst moment of the night was when he surrendered that long TD pass to the Seahawks David Moore. Where was the safety help Cousins should have provided and that the cornerback was obviously expecting? Simply poor decisionmaking on Cousins' part. For 60 or 80 Kazillion or whatever they're paying Cousins, Vikings fans deserve better!

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

Interesting rooting decision upcoming Sunday. SF or NO? If you told me Seattle will beat the Rams. Go SF!!!. But I don't know if that will be the outcome of the SEA-LA game. So I don't know which to go with between SF or NO. Seattle right now has a first round bye and that's what is most important. The #1 seed is just the cherry on top.

Great analysis. This above was the first thing I thought about. Wishing for a leading division opponent to win another game is a horrible call. Always want to win the division. But here's a thought: even dropping a game to SF over the rest of the season gives us a chance to win the division week 17, as long as we win that game.

So, ultimately beneficial to the 'Hawks would be a 'Hawks win and a 49ers win. I think.

 

[sutz]

I'm still of the mind that #1/#2 seed is not that important of a split, and there's not much you can do about it if you don't play the competitive team head to head, so I won't root for the Niners when we're in a game by game competition for our division crown. Doesn't make sense.

We had our chance against the Saints and blew it. Our bad there. But rooting for the Niners to win when we need them to lose isn't in my DNA.

:49ersmall: :49ersmall: :49ersmall: :49ersmall: :49ersmall: :49ersmall:

 

[The Twelvethman]

FINAL THOUGHTS

With the 49ers beating the Packers, the 49ers losing to the Ravens, and the Seahawks beating the Vikings, makes the Seahawks the #2 seed. Had the others who can't do math gotten their desired result with the Packers winning, the Seahawks would be the #3 seed, and not have a bye week.

I believe if the Packers had of won last week we would have the #1 seed now, once we beat the Eagles we owned the tiebreaker over the Packers and they help us own it over the Saints if the three have the same records, so wanting GB to win was the correct choice and now in hindsight would have SF 1.5 games back.

 

[Ozzy]

Your blind allegiance to anything Pete does is admirable. By the way I think he is an all time great coach. He is way too conservative at times and it could potentially cost him. His two punts at the end of the San Fran game should have cost him but thankfully it didnt. Surrender index isn't the only metric pointing out that punting at midfield on 4th and short....I'll say it again you're overvaluing 30 yards instead of possibly scoring yourself, burning more clock etc. The reward outweighs the risk.

I do have the numbers showing most teams go for it there. I can post them and do the research for you but you were being snarky so not sure it's even worth it.

Damned if you do, damned if you dont: No one is going to kill Pete if he turns the ball over at the 50. Hell he's even punted at the opponents 35. Again no one is going to criticize him for that. It's another dumb argument.

As for prefacing posts about liking Pete....it should be obvious. Spend any time on here, on twitter or anywhere on social media and it's always met with the same response. "you know more than Pete!" "Were 10-2 and you're just hating on Pete!" I could go on and on and it's already shown up in this thread.

Conventional wisdom has changed on this and you're late to the party, as is Pete. Which in a lot of ways is understandable. He's coached for 40 years doing it that way. We now KNOW it's probably a better idea to go for it in most instances. As we gather more information, technology, studying outcomes etc it's blatantly obvious. If this defense turns into the old LOB all time great type of defense then maybe, maybe it makes more sense to be a little more conservative at times. I would also argue we went away from cover 3 way too early in this game and their offense woke up and got them back in the game (along with our mistakes) but I can't say that because who dares question Pete!

Weren't you and tical arguing that Russell wasn't elite as well here recently? How'd that go?

It continues to be an area that Pete gets wrong. It had a surrender index of 85% which is ridiculous. Everyone keeps defending Pete and says it's not a big deal which so far has been true. Except it's not a big deal until it is and it costs us a game. It's an easy fix though so maybe in higher leverage instances he gets it right.

Let me know when punting on 4th down from our own side of the field with 57 minutes remaining in the game costs us a game. Thanks :2thumbs:

Also, in regards to the "surrender index",

This project contains a Twitter bot that automatically tweets every time there is a punt in an NFL game. It tweets each punt's "Surrender Index" - a completely arbitrary metric created by SB Nation's Jon Bois to quantify how cowardly a punt is.

https://github.com/andrew-shackelford/Surrender-Index

You guys are literally using a completely arbitrary metric to try to legitimize your opinion that Pete is wrong, continues to be wrong, and is apparently a coward. Which is far more ridiculous than punting on 4th down from our own side of the field 3 minutes into the 1st quarter.

Well when almost every other coach in the league goes for it there because the numbers say you should then its a bad decision.

Do you have anything to support your assertion that almost every other coach in the league goes for it on 4th down on their own side of the field 3 minutes into the first quarter? You don't have to answer that. We both know you don't. I doubt half the coaches in the league go for it there, but I also doubt there's any way to prove it one way or the other.

I love Pete as much as anyone but this weird allegiance to every single decision he makes like he's infallible is strange.

It's also strange that some here immediately resort to comments like this when someone disagrees with a criticism of Pete. I seriously doubt there are more than a tiny handful of people that think Pete is infallible, and I'm sure as hell not one of them.

There are many other metrics that should its smarter to just go for it instead of gaining the potential 30 yards in field position. Points matter and you have a better chance of scoring more if you go for it. The risk outweighs the reward. Harbaugh in Baltimore talked about this in a recent interview and moving forward it will continue to be a situation where more and more teams do go for it.

That's great, and I get that things are changing in regards to the conventional wisdom on whether or not to go for it on 4th down. However, coaches are constantly faced with "damned if you do, damned if you don't" decisions. Pete chooses to punt it there, he gets criticized. Pete chooses to go for it there, he gets criticized. Even if the team converts the 4th down some would criticize taking the unnecessary risk of possibly giving the Vikings great field position for seemingly no reason on their very first drive of the game.

You said let you know when it costs us a game but that's not really true. if Pete does do this and it does costs us a game you won't admit and neither will every other Pete apologist on this subject.

No. It really is true. You let me know when punting on 4th down on our own side of the field with 57 minutes remaining in the game costs us a game and I'll eat the biggest plate of crow you've ever seen. And again, I'm not a Pete apologist. I simply disagree with you, Fade, and Baldwin on this particular criticism of this particular 4th down decision.

We get it Pete is perfect and if you don't agree you're not a true fan. This take is tiring.

I'd argue that the melodramatic fallacy you just resorted too is far more tiring.

Any thoughts on the "surrender index" and your citing of it to support your argument? Thought I'd ask since you ignored that part of my post and instead tried to create the fallacy that I'm some sort of blind Pete loyalist that believes everything he does is perfect and that he never makes any mistakes.