NFL 2016 Divisional: THE GREATEST GAME

[Jace, Extat]

Eyeball test, they've failed it every time I watched them. The offense was stagnant to the point of nauseating (I have no idea how Peterson led the league in rushing again), and the defense was good but not great enough to stop true powerhouses.

Sure, they threw in a somewhat competitive contest against the maddeningly inconsistent Cardinals, but that's the only time all year I thought they performed at acceptable levels against a quality team. And no, I don't think the win over a punch-drunk Packers team in week 17 really mattered.

Don't get me wrong, major props to Zimmer for finding ways for his below-average team to claw their way to 11-5, but I had high expectations for Bridgewater and this team and was consistently unimpressed.

[sperry]

Bridgewater has not looked great at QB.  They're likely to commit to him for a while since they've won some games, but that's been defense plus Adrian Peterson. He has to get a lot better for them to have any chance.

[sperry]

Bridgewater has not looked great at QB.  They're likely to commit to him for a while since they've won some games, but that's been defense plus Adrian Peterson. He has to get a lot better for them to have any chance.

[Maithanet]

2 minutes ago, sperry said:

Bridgewater has not looked great at QB.  They're likely to commit to him for a while since they've won some games, but that's been defense plus Adrian Peterson. He has to get a lot better for them to have any chance.

Agreed, the main area that the Vikings need to get better compared to all the other NFC playoff teams was at quarterback.  The defense was good, running game was solid, pass catching weapons are acceptable.  I like Bridgewater and hope he puts it together, but the Vikes took him to the playoffs, not the other way around.

Jace, I don't know how you can call them below average when the went 2-5 against playoff teams (wins over GB and KC), and 9-1 against non playoff teams.  They are like a perfect example of a team that is consistently good but never great. 

[Maithanet]

2 minutes ago, sperry said:

Bridgewater has not looked great at QB.  They're likely to commit to him for a while since they've won some games, but that's been defense plus Adrian Peterson. He has to get a lot better for them to have any chance.

Agreed, the main area that the Vikings need to get better compared to all the other NFC playoff teams was at quarterback.  The defense was good, running game was solid, pass catching weapons are acceptable.  I like Bridgewater and hope he puts it together, but the Vikes took him to the playoffs, not the other way around.

Jace, I don't know how you can call them below average when the went 2-5 against playoff teams (wins over GB and KC), and 9-1 against non playoff teams.  They are like a perfect example of a team that is consistently good but never great. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

I think you're massively overlooking how good the Vikings defense is. They would beat teams into submission and were great at not allowing teams to play their game. They only had one bad game (the first game verse Seattle), and they were missing their 3 best players on defense, 5 starters in all, and by the end of the game had only one healthy safety on the team.

Regarding Bridgewater, there are a lot of things working against him. We have a bad pass blocking O-Line, very limited receivers outside of Diggs and Rudolph, and most importantly, AP. AP and Teddy want to play completely different styles of offense, and Norv has sided with AP's preferance.

[Jace, Extat]

On a note:

Surprised at how many of you thought Peyton played poorly. I saw at least 6 drops, and possibly as many as 9. You turn those into catches, and just assume the guy gets tackled immediately and his statline suddenly looks more like 30-37 300ish yards. Which, I don't know about you, is what I'd describe as pretty good. Normally I don't like to play the 'if they caught it game', but the dropsies were undeniable and horrendous for Denver, and the running game was putrid. All that in 17 to 20 mph worth of wind.

Not saying the Broncos are gonna win next week, as NE's offense and defense are better than Pitt's (and fucking special teams), but I heard the weather is supposed to be nice and I expect a pick or two from Manning on a night where he tries to press as the Pats march down the field again and again for 31 points with the superior QB and coaches.

Basically, what I saw last night looked a lot more like 2012 Peyton Manning than 2015 Peyton Manning. Yes, the balls fluttered, but they still got there on time and I saw a number of good throws. If there's less wind and E-Man can hold onto a goddamn ball next week I give the Broncos a fair 35% chance.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

12 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Agreed, the main area that the Vikings need to get better compared to all the other NFC playoff teams was at quarterback.  The defense was good, running game was solid, pass catching weapons are acceptable.  I like Bridgewater and hope he puts it together, but the Vikes took him to the playoffs, not the other way around.

Jace, I don't know how you can call them below average when the went 2-5 against playoff teams (wins over GB and KC), and 9-1 against non playoff teams.  They are like a perfect example of a team that is consistently good but never great.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight..........

Because the second year QB who has started all of 27 games outplayed Wilson last week.......

And Captain Kirk, having the same number of starts as TB, has still yet to beat a team with a winning record..........

He just turned 23. Give it time.

[Altherion]

1 hour ago, Jaime L said:

Hmm, interesting: 538 has Carolina and Denver as 61% and 59% favorites respectively. It's almost entirely a reflection of homefield being a bigger advantage than we all generally pay heed to. Denver and NE have virtually the exact same ELO rating.

ELO works well in chess, but I'm not sure if it is all that useful in a game where the team will play no matter what, but key players can come and go as they sustain or recover from injuries. If, for example, Aaron Rodgers had gotten injured on the last play of the game with Washington, the odds for the game against Arizona would have changed drastically, but the ELO-based prediction would stay the same. In this case, it is missing the fact that Edelman and the New England O-line are back and this makes the Patriots a considerably better team than they were in December.

That said, I'm not sure the various articles claiming that Denver has no chance because Brady is still playing like Brady whereas Manning is a shadow of himself are right. Neither team had played to the best of their abilities last weekend. There were a lot of dropped passes (more for Denver, but New England had some too) and the New England defense allowed too many third down conversions and appeared to think the game is over after some point (though to be fair, it pretty much was). I think New England has more room for improvement (and given their coach, I suspect that they will improve), but as long as Manning doesn't start throwing picks, it's not so clear that they'll beat Denver by a substantial margin.

[sperry]

17 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I think you're massively overlooking how good the Vikings defense is. They would beat teams into submission and were great at not allowing teams to play their game. They only had one bad game (the first game verse Seattle), and they were missing their 3 best players on defense, 5 starters in all, and by the end of the game had only one healthy safety on the team.

Regarding Bridgewater, there are a lot of things working against him. We have a bad pass blocking O-Line, very limited receivers outside of Diggs and Rudolph, and most importantly, AP. AP and Teddy want to play completely different styles of offense, and Norv has sided with AP's preferance.

 

Having a dominant running back opens up everything else in the offense and makes Bridgewater's life way, way easier. It is exponentially easier for him to throw the ball because teams have to stack the box against the run.  That's what makes Bridgewater's pedestrian numbers really concerning.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

11 minutes ago, sperry said:

 

Having a dominant running back opens up everything else in the offense and makes Bridgewater's life way, way easier. It is exponentially easier for him to throw the ball because teams have to stack the box against the run.  That's what makes Bridgewater's pedestrian numbers really concerning.

This is the conventional wisdom, but I don't think it applies here. AP would leave the Viks with a lot of third and longs because his running style is boom or bust, and there is a lot less boom these days. If he gets 20 carries, 10 will be for nothing or a loss, 5 will be for 1-4 yeards, and 5 will be 5+ and you just hope 1 or 2 turn into big runs.

Again, it's important to recognize there is a clash of offensive preferences between Teddy and AP. Teddy wants to opperate out of the shotgun and AP wants to run behind a QB that plays under center. Teddy's numbers are much worse when he's under center. His stats get compared to Carr and Bortles and they look very unimpressive, but you have to remember the Vikings are playing ball control while the Jags and the Raiders were often behind so they had to let their QBs throw it 50 times a game.

[Maithanet]

38 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight..........

Because the second year QB who has started all of 27 games outplayed Wilson last week.......

And Captain Kirk, having the same number of starts as TB, has still yet to beat a team with a winning record..........

He just turned 23. Give it time.

Looking at stats this year, Bridgewater is way behind the other 5 NFC quarterbacks.  I don't think you could even argue it, because it isn't close.  His QB rating is 88.7, the next lowest is Rodgers at 93.  He had 3,231 yards this year, the next lowest is Rodgers with 3,821.  He had 14 passing tds this year, the next lowest is Cousins with 29!  He had nine interceptions, so I suppose that is better than Cousins/Palmer with 11 each, but I think most coaches will trade 15 touchdowns for 2 additional picks.

And "give it time"?  Isn't that exactly what I said with the quote "I like Bridgewater and hope he puts it together"?  I liked him in college, and thought it was weird that draftniks were making a big deal of his poor performance at his pro day.  You know who looked great at pro day?  Jamarcus Russell.  Bridgewater looked great on the field in college, with live defenders, and that is what actually matters. I hope he can continue to develop as a pro.  But that doesn't change the fact that he was the worst qb starting in the NFC this year.  No shame in that, four of those guys are damn good quarterbacks, and Cousins had a great year. 

[Maithanet]

Double?  Honestly.

[Jaime L]

1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

Looking at stats this year, Bridgewater is way behind the other 5 NFC quarterbacks.  I don't think you could even argue it, because it isn't close.  His QB rating is 88.7, the next lowest is Rodgers at 93.  He had 3,231 yards this year, the next lowest is Rodgers with 3,821.  He had 14 passing tds this year, the next lowest is Cousins with 29!  He had nine interceptions, so I suppose that is better than Cousins/Palmer with 11 each, but I think most coaches will trade 15 touchdowns for 2 additional picks.

And "give it time"?  Isn't that exactly what I said with the quote "I like Bridgewater and hope he puts it together"?  I liked him in college, and thought it was weird that draftniks were making a big deal of his poor performance at his pro day.  You know who looked great at pro day?  Jamarcus Russell.  Bridgewater looked great on the field in college, with live defenders, and that is what actually matters. I hope he can continue to develop as a pro.  But that doesn't change the fact that he was the worst qb starting in the NFC this year.  No shame in that, four of those guys are damn good quarterbacks, and Cousins had a great year. 

This. 

Love ya Tywin but you're reaching here. Keep in mind the last time your defense and running game was clicking, you made the playoffs with Christian Ponder. 

Granted Teddy is already better than that. but by any other measure Teddy was a below average QB this year. I mean 14 TD passes in a season would only be respectable if this was 1995. Even taking into account how reluctant Minnesota was to pass, he still rated 22nd in the league on a per-play basis per DVOA. BUT he was still a good enough QB that the Vikings could win with him which with most 2nd year QBs, you'd never be able to say that about, Cousins especially. And as you say he's only 23 so there's a ton of upside. But let's wait until he actually starts playing at a higher level before comparing him to guys who are significantly further along. 

 

[Jack Bauer 24]

Can Doug Pederson lead Philly to the promise land?

[Maithanet]

2 minutes ago, Jack Bauer 24 said:

Can Doug Pederson lead Philly to the promise land?

I don't know, what do you think?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Eh, I guess this is a battle I'm not going to win. I just wanted to highlight that his stats do not show how well he played, especially when you consider bad line play, a bad receiving core and the Vikings play style was all about slowing down the game. As you've said yourself Jamie, Norv still thinks it's the 90's.

49 minutes ago, Jaime L said:

 

Love ya Tywin but you're reaching here. Keep in mind the last time your defense and running game was clicking, you made the playoffs with Christian Ponder.

 

 

Do not mention He Who Must Not Be Ever Talked About!

The horror.....

[Jace, Extat]

So I saw some pictures of JPP's hand today, both healed and what appears to be an ER shot immediately following.

I'm not gonna link it, so google it at your own risk. Let me say this though, I've put in a lot of hours in the ER and witnessed some gruesome shit but I'm not sure I've ever seen anything quite like that on what was formerly a human hand. The man's lucky to have more than a thumb and pinky finger, and frankly he's lucky he has a hand.

I'm not sure what in the hell he was doing with those fireworks or indeed what kind they were, but that looks like horror stories I've only ever heard about involving guys holding onto M-80's. I now understand why he wouldn't meet with the Giants for so long afterwards. He owes a considerable amount of gratitude to the surgeon who saved what remains.

 

[Matrim Fox Cauthon]

Cardinals > Panthers and Patriots > Broncos, because God hates me. 

[aceluby]

21 hours ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

Eyeball test, they've failed it every time I watched them. The offense was stagnant to the point of nauseating (I have no idea how Peterson led the league in rushing again), and the defense was good but not great enough to stop true powerhouses.

Sure, they threw in a somewhat competitive contest against the maddeningly inconsistent Cardinals, but that's the only time all year I thought they performed at acceptable levels against a quality team. And no, I don't think the win over a punch-drunk Packers team in week 17 really mattered.

Don't get me wrong, major props to Zimmer for finding ways for his below-average team to claw their way to 11-5, but I had high expectations for Bridgewater and this team and was consistently unimpressed.

Wait, what?  Lost to the Seahawks by one, Cardinals by 3, Broncos by 3, and had only 3 other losses to the Hawks, 9ers, and GB where the entire team played absolutely awful.

If there is anything to criticize about the Vikings it has to be the ultra conservative play calling on offense and absolutely abysmal pocket protection.  Those were problems all year and doesn't play to the strength of Bridgewater who is a pocket passer.