Week 13 - Vikings @ Seahawks Support Group

[Reignman]

Dec 2, 2019 22:23:19 GMT -6 vikecycle said:

Dec 2, 2019 22:20:54 GMT -6 Reignman said:

Might be dumbest coaching decision of the year. You gotta stop them anyway, so why not on an 80 yard field? Now you're going to give up an easy FG minimum so at best you can only send this game to OT.

As I've said earlier, love that the league is more aggressive lately, but there's such a thing as being stupidly aggressive, and that was it.

GB lost to SEA last year by doing the exact opposite of what we did, and punting.

Against Wilson, you dont intentionally put the game on his ability to pick up a single first down.

Doing the exact opposite of what we did? So you're saying they trailed by one possession late, had all 3 timeouts, punted the ball, and Seattle ran out the clock?

Well holy sh*t! Did you look that up? No wait, you're a Packers fan so you probably remember that painful moment well. How did you know that? See you're not helping those rumors about you when you have moments like this lol.

Oh but wait, there are a few major differences between our game and theirs. 4 to be exact.

1. there was 4:20 remaining, not 2:31
2. the Packers only had 1 timeout remaining, not 3
3. they were at their own 33, not 42
4. they don't have the elite Zimmer defense

Yeah I don't know why any team would go for it on 4th down from their own 33 with 4:20 remaining. But to be fair, the Pukers defense couldn't stop the predictable runs either, giving up 2 quick first downs on just 4 carries. They still would have had an opportunity to get the ball back had they had 2 more timeouts and could actually stop the next 3 runs. And once again, in this scenario Wilson had nothing to do with the final drive except when he was taking a knee, so why do you guys keep pretending like he's a factor lol?

Nice try though. You attempted to use evidence, the evidence just wasn't as good as you remembered it to be. Plus I never claimed a team couldn't lose by punting the ball away lol. The argument is about what's the best strategy, given the situation, and I think I thoroughly proved that in my last post where I shredded Funkytown feels before facts defense.

[GreatSouthernViking]

What I'm wondering is, in that situation, is it worth the gamble to have the punter scramble wide to buy time, then when receivers are down field a little bit try to kick a lowish, shortish ball on the full to a one-on-one. What would happen if we caught it on the full? Is this allowed? What would happen if it came off Seattle hands?
How about if we dribbled a that could bounce anywhere and may be touched by Seattle first?
Or do the rules state the punt returner must have first play/decision on the ball?
Guessing the danger is that if they get the ball our ability to stop them may break down and lead to an easy touchdown. But would it be worth the gamble in that situation?

[Reignman]

Dec 3, 2019 4:21:16 GMT -6 GreatSouthernViking said:

What I'm wondering is, in that situation, is it worth the gamble to have the punter scramble wide to buy time, then when receivers are down field a little bit try to kick a lowish, shortish ball on the full to a one-on-one. What would happen if we caught it on the full? Is this allowed?

You can't risk having the punter scramble around for several reasons. He'll most likely get tackled and/or fumble. They're not very skilled when it comes to handling the ball or running lol.

Also there already isn't much time for them to receive the snap and punt the ball away before defenders are on him. Except our defenders when Seattle is running a fake punt. The other risk of having the punter hold the ball a little longer is you could draw a penalty for illegal man downfield. Certain positions have to remain within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage until the ball is punted or it's a penalty. Holding the ball could throw their timing off.

The punt team can catch the ball on the fly, but only if the receiving team lets it go. If they wave for a fair catch, you have to let them catch it. They can't try to return a fair catch however. So in many cases the receiving team will wave for a fair catch, but then let the ball go to prevent the receiving team from catching it themselves or downing it inside the 10.

If the punting team does catch the ball on the fly (or on the full), it's not a live ball so they won't retain possession. The ball will be declared dead at that spot and the receiving team would take over on offense from there.

Dec 3, 2019 4:21:16 GMT -6 GreatSouthernViking said:

What would happen if it came off Seattle hands?

If the ball touches a Seattle player, it's then a live ball (fumble) and the Vikings can recover it. It's called a muffed punt, which technically goes down as a fumble. The punting team can't advance a muffed punt however, their offense takes over wherever they first gain possession.

Dec 3, 2019 4:21:16 GMT -6 GreatSouthernViking said:

How about if we dribbled a that could bounce anywhere and may be touched by Seattle first?

If it bounces along the ground first and it touches Seattle, it's still a muffed punt that the Vikings can recover. Unless it touches a Vikings player first, then it's no longer a live ball and it can't be muffed by Seattle. In fact if the Vikings touch it first, a Seahawks player can touch, or even gain possession, fumble the ball away, and it still won't count as a fumble. It's a goofy rule. The key is who touches it first.

Dec 3, 2019 4:21:16 GMT -6 GreatSouthernViking said:

Or do the rules state the punt returner must have first play/decision on the ball?

If the punt returner waves for a fair catch, then the receiving team must allow him to field it first. If the returner just lets it go or tries to get out of the way, then the punting team will try to do what they can to prevent the ball from going into the end zone.

Dec 3, 2019 4:21:16 GMT -6 GreatSouthernViking said:

Guessing the danger is that if they get the ball our ability to stop them may break down and lead to an easy touchdown.

Statistically, it'd be very rare for the receiving team to score a TD there or on the ensuing possession because they're mainly concerned about trying to run the clock out at that point. Normally it should be easy for a defense to force them to punt the ball back due to the predictable play calling. In my earlier post I showed how it was statistically better to punt the ball away in that situation over going for it on 4th and 3.

Dec 3, 2019 4:21:16 GMT -6 GreatSouthernViking said:

But would it be worth the gamble?

Punting the ball away is worth the gamble if you have a defense good enough to stop the 3 predictable run plays that the other team is about to attempt lol. But it being a gamble depends on the situation, like how many timeouts you have, and how good your defense is, or even the field position. The Vikings had 3 timeouts so it's not as risky punting the ball away. If you have no timeouts, then you're not going to want to punt the ball away because you can't stop the clock, and probably wouldn't get it back. With 3 timeouts, and 2:31 to go (plus the clock automatically stops at 2:00), if the Vikings could stop Seattle's 3 run plays, call their timeouts after each, they would have gotten the ball back with still 2 minutes to go. It's questionable whether or not our lousy defense could stop the 3 predictable runs however, so I guess Zim was compelled to go for it on 4th down instead. Which was a bad decision IMO. An opinion backed up by historical evidence.

[Reignman]

Fun fact: Since 1998, teams with a pick-6 won 77.8% (865/1110) of the time. The Vikings had been 30-5 (.857). Zimmer 8-0.

[diehardtwinsfan]

Dec 3, 2019 0:18:41 GMT -6 Reignman said:

Dec 2, 2019 22:22:30 GMT -6 Funkytown said:

You're wrong.

Care to explain why you think so? If our defense is so damn elite, you punt in that situation. Teams with a lousy defense go for it there because they know they're not getting the ball back. So which is it? Is our defense elite or crap? I know the answer, but it's not my opinion that matters. Was that Zim letting us know he finally doesn't have confidence in the precious defense he built?

Here are the facts. We were at our own 42 with 2:31 to go. If we punt the ball away, Seattle gets pinned inside the 20, or at the very least it's a TB. Then if everyone does their job, which shouldn't have been too difficult because they knew Seattle would run up the middle 3 times to make us burn our timeouts, they should be punting back to us from inside their own 30 with about 2 minutes to go. We have 2 minutes to go about 75 yards with no timeouts, which is plenty of time with Seattle playing prevent. Down 4, we're in great shape to finally win a big game at the end. We never do because the Vikings never put themselves in great shape to win at the end. They're only great at putting themselves in a position to lose it seems.

I think the odds of them stopping Seattle on 3 straight runs should have been better than them picking up a 4th and 3 from their own 42. But as I said in my previous post, we're all overlooking one important factor? That is the Vikings. It wouldn't have mattered what we did because the offense and defense were having a contest of who could sh*t the bed more. We decided to go for it, so the offense got the first shot to put a nail in the coffin and then the defense couldn't stop the 1 dimentional Seahawks anyway, so they added one more nail, which opened the door for the ST to put the final nail in our coffin. The bed sh*tting at the end was a total team effort.

Seattle ran it up the middle repeatedly when we didn't get the stop on 4th down... we couldn't stop it and they kicked a FG... 

It was the right call. You can argue the play call, and I'll simply point out that Mattison was open on that play at the yellow line. 

[vikingpitbull]

Mattison wasn't really open. It looked at first but he had a LB right on him. The replay showed it.

It was a total let down on all phases at different times.

Why the hell did we rush so much with that much time on the clock?

Again situational football errors by Zimmer.

If you are basing the game on a 4th down you call a TO to set up a good play and get people settled down and talk it over. Either on 3rd or 4th down or both.

Going for it you are expecting to make it so TO won't be needed for the D to win you need to score a TD. In other words Zimmer didn't trust his D nor his O.

Kirk panicked on 4th down and it was a terrible pass.

3rd and 4th down where terrible play calls plain and simple.

If you know you have to get a TD you do your team the favor not the other.

Zimmer was shaking so bad I doubt he even knew what was going on. His decision making made no sense at to me.

He put both sides of our team in bad spots and it cost them all.

This is just another example of a Zimmer lead team that cant win the big games when needed.

There are no more excuses this team is just what it is.

Mediocre.

They are what they are and won't be anything more or less.

Just another wasted year for fans that still hold hope.

[71vikes]

Whew, I thought I was the pessimist. Big picture view: this game was a loss when it was put on the schedule. To win at Seattle when they are even decent takes an almost perfect game and we were far from that. As I said before, I was worried the defense couldn't stop Seattle, primarily the pass defense. But the run defense was even worse, giving up 218 yards. Defense gave up 444 yards total. TOP was 39:45 to 20:15. We turned the ball over 3 times on the road to a good team. We were taken out of our game and wound up running 14(!!!) times and passing 38 (yes we were behind). All that adds up to a loss. We were beaten at our own game. More big picture: we have a very good chance of going 12-4 and securing a playoff spot. I think if any one of us had the option to lock that in at the start of the season, we would have taken it. We are better than any of the remaining teams on our schedule and should run the table, and that includes the Pukers. Finally, Cousins isn't 0-8 on MNF. His TEAMS are. You may be able to pin a couple of those losses on him, maybe more. But not last night. Our problem ain't Cuz. Right now it's injuries to key players (Theilen) and a defense that just isn't what it needs to be. Wild Card and one-and-done. That's how we roll. The key to being a Vikings fan is to lower expectations. We jut don't win games like last night. Never have, probably never will.

[Funkytown]

Meanwhile, penalties continue to kill us.

[Funkytown]

When called upon, Ruuuuudy continues to be a bright spot! Some of his catches this year have been AMAZING!

[Funkytown]

THIS man.

[PurpleKoolaid]

Cousins missed the open man on the 4th down. Why aernt people talking about that? Cousins had another bad game. Our D needs a good game from Cousins (he certainly is getting paid to have them), but Cousins rarely steps up to the plate for tough opponents. Having Cook and Thielen out didnt help matters. Having a GM that cant find a WR to save his life (unless 2 happen to fall right in his lap) doesnt help. Bisi prolly wont even be on this team next year. If Treadwell is, I will personally fire Ricky boy myself. His lack of talent in finding a QB or WR in the draft is unparalleled. And I am guessing Zimmer has no positive impact on drafting on the O side of the ball. He just coasts through the ST and I, hoping his coaching can do enough, cause he is too busy with his superb defense, the mighty Z Fense LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOL, what a buffoon.

[PurpleKoolaid]

Dec 3, 2019 10:39:51 GMT -6 Funkytown said:

When called upon, Ruuuuudy continues to be a bright spot! Some of his catches this year have been AMAZING!

He is Mr TD. He is clutch, one of the few Vikings you can say this about. But you have to wonder why he doesnt get more catches in the middle of the field. What he lacks in speed and running crisp routes, he more than makes up for with his hands. Quit throwing the ball to Diggs and start using Rudy as your first read Cousins. I think I am one of the few who think Cousins had a crap day. But thats what happens when the only decent RB you have gets hurt.

[Funkytown]

Dec 3, 2019 11:38:43 GMT -6 PurpleKoolaid said:

Cousins missed the open man on the 4th down. Why aernt people talking about that? Cousins had another bad game.

Not true.

Dec 3, 2019 11:38:43 GMT -6 PurpleKoolaid said:

Our D needs a good game from Cousins (he certainly is getting paid to have them), but Cousins rarely steps up to the plate for tough opponents. Having Cook and Thielen out didnt help matters. Having a GM that cant find a WR to save his life (unless 2 happen to fall right in his lap) doesnt help. Bisi prolly wont even be on this team next year.

This makes no sense at all.

Dec 3, 2019 11:38:43 GMT -6 PurpleKoolaid said:

If Treadwell is, I will personally fire Ricky boy myself. His lack of talent in finding a QB or WR in the draft is unparalleled.

Again, not true.

Dec 3, 2019 11:38:43 GMT -6 PurpleKoolaid said:

He just coasts through the ST and I, hoping his coaching can do enough, cause he is too busy with his superb defense, the mighty Z Fense LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOL, what a buffoon.

A buffoon, huh? 

[PurpleKoolaid]

Dec 3, 2019 11:43:47 GMT -6 Funkytown said:

Dec 3, 2019 11:38:43 GMT -6 PurpleKoolaid said:

Cousins missed the open man on the 4th down. Why aernt people talking about that? Cousins had another bad game.

Not true.

Dec 3, 2019 11:38:43 GMT -6 PurpleKoolaid said:

Our D needs a good game from Cousins (he certainly is getting paid to have them), but Cousins rarely steps up to the plate for tough opponents. Having Cook and Thielen out didnt help matters. Having a GM that cant find a WR to save his life (unless 2 happen to fall right in his lap) doesnt help. Bisi prolly wont even be on this team next year.

This makes no sense at all.

Dec 3, 2019 11:38:43 GMT -6 PurpleKoolaid said:

If Treadwell is, I will personally fire Ricky boy myself. His lack of talent in finding a QB or WR in the draft is unparalleled.

Again, not true.

Dec 3, 2019 11:38:43 GMT -6 PurpleKoolaid said:

He just coasts through the ST and I, hoping his coaching can do enough, cause he is too busy with his superb defense, the mighty Z Fense LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOL, what a buffoon.

A buffoon, huh? 

LOL, typical funky response. No reason why I'm wrong, just she doesnt agree with it. Did Cousins have a good game? No. And we needed a good game.

What doesnt make sense about Bisi not making the team next year? Plenty of snaps, rarely any good plays. And buffoom describes zimmer perfectly.

[Funkytown]

Dec 3, 2019 11:49:15 GMT -6 PurpleKoolaid said:

LOL, typical funky response. No reason why I'm wrong, just she doesnt agree with it. Did Cousins have a good game? No. And we needed a good game.

What doesnt make sense about Bisi not making the team next year? Plenty of snaps, rarely any good plays. And buffoom describes zimmer perfectly.

How did Cousins have a bad game? He didn't. I've read hundreds of comments from Vikings fans, and you're literally the only one suggesting Cousins had a bad game. I thought it was obvious as to why you're wrong, because you are. Great game? Not exactly. Bad game? Absolutely not. 

Why wouldn't a young guy like Bisi Johnson make the team next year? As a team looking to get most out of their young players and save money, you think we're going to cut a guy like Bisi Johnson? It absolutely DOES NOT make sense to cut him.