The Minnesota Vikings travel to Soldier Field today in search of redemption for an early season loss that was well within their grasp for victory before a late-game meltdown led to a Rex Grossmann game-winning touchdown in a close contest. If tradition means anything, the Vikings ought to win today as the two teams have been fairly consistent in splitting their regular-season games in previous years.
Since tradition really has no bearing on today's game, however, other, more tangible matters merit consideration. And, upon further review of such matters, today's game very well could lead to a Vikings' victory.
Of all the things that will determine the outcome of today's Vikings' game against Chicago, several stand out. There's the possible absence of defensive lineman Pat Williams whose run-stuffing ability has been unparalleled in the NFL this season. There's the Bears' defense which has posted 24 sacks this season despite relying on several young defenders and a sometimes suspect secondary that makes pass rushing less effective. And there's the home-field advantage, at three points to the home team a meaningful item given the tendency of the Vikings and Bears to play each other close.
But more telling than those items for today's game probably will be the play of the respective quarterbacks. Vikings' quarterback Brad Johnson is coming off one of his better performances of the season while Bears' quarterback Rex Grossman is coming off one of his worst performances of the season in a loss at New England. And if you think that's just a one-game blip for each quarterback, other numbers might be worth considering.
For the season, Johnson has thrown for 2410 yards, 8 touchdowns and 10 interceptions with a 77.3 quarterback rating. Hardly gaudy numbers, to be certain, but consider the opposition's equally unimpressive numbers. For the season, Grossman has thrown for 2390 yards, 18 touchdowns and 14 interceptions with a quarterback rating of 77.6.
Now, factor in one additional statistic. For the season, the far-from-nimble Grossman has been sacked a mere 13 times for a loss of 90 yards. Johnson, meanwhile, has been sacked 24 times for a loss of 169 yards. In a league in which most games are decided by less than a touchdown, drive-killing sacks often are the difference between winning and losing. And drive-killing sacks--not to mention the ever-present pass pressure that Johnson has felt game in and game out--have been one of the Vikings' leading problems this season.
Last week against Arizona, the Vikings inserted Jason Whittle and Mike Rosenthal into the right guard and right tackle positions, respectively. And while the tandem's best days likely are behind them and Rosenthal, at his peak with the Vikings, has been a revolving door on the pass rush, the two offer a semblance of run blocking and at least a modicum of an obstacle to the pass rush that neither Artis Hicks nor Marcus Johnson appeared to offer, not to mention a greater penchant for abstaining from costly false-start and holding penalties in the red zone.
The presence of Whittle and Rosenthal rather than Hicks and Johnson should mean less pressure on Johnson and should translate into greater success in the red zone than the Vikings were able to muster in their first meeting with Chicago this season. That, and Grossman's modest-at-best performance behind the highest paid and, arguably, sound Chicago offensive line, should provide the Vikings an opening for victory on Sunday.
If Williams sits, look for the Bears to try to run the ball to open up the passing game. If Williams plays, the Bears will be forced to lead with the pass. And that could make things dicey from the outset for Chicago. Beyond Cedric Griffin and Antonio Winfield, the Vikings' secondary has been highly suspect this season. But with Griffin likely to get his second start in place of the very disappointing Fred Smoot in the base package, and Grossman as their quarterback, the Bears should find it difficult to replicate the middle-of-the-field passing scheme that other teams have so successfully employed against Minnesota this year.
A win won't change the division race, one long ago conceded to the Bears. But it will spur the Vikings' playoff hopes and should provide confidence that the offense can accomplish the modest and that the team can play with the best in what is a mediocre to weak NFC.
Up Next: Post game.
Saturday, December 02, 2006
Friday, December 01, 2006
Denny's Futility Felt From Afar
Sitting on a rickshaw in the South of India, I found access to the Vikings' recent victory over the Arizona Cardinals only in the post-game reviews. That's unfortunate given that this game looked promising from the moment that it was scheduled and, judging from the play by play, lived up to its billing as a close Vikings' victory.
From the outset, two certainities availed themselves with respect to the game's outcome. The first was that, no matter the teams' respective records or on-field performances leading into the game, the Vikings would prevail. And no matter what the Vikings did to assist the Cardinals, Denny Green would do just enough to fall short--just enough to be able to blame the loss on his players rather than on a running attack that featured a mere six rushing attempts.
We knew these two facts at the time that the Vikings' game was scheduled because we knew that the game meant something to Denny. Nothing would have satisfied Green more than to return to the Metrodome and to end the Vikings' modest playoff prospects.
But Denny doesn't win when it matters. And that spelled doom from the outset for the Cardinals. The result was a much needed Vikings' victory that, combined with the continuing inadequacies of enough other NFC teams, gives the Vikings renewed hope for crashing the post-season party.
Offensive Line Shows Up
In the aftermath of Sunday's game, former Vikings' and current Cardinal's offensive line coach Steve Loney commented that the Vikings' offensive line played well. "When things go wrong, the offensive line is an easy target," Loney commented, "mostly because most people don't really understand how an offensive line works."
Loney's point was that an offensive line takes cohesiveness to work. The implication was that the Vikings finally have some offensive line cohesiveness and that that cohesiveness spurred the Vikings' offensive attack.
Loney's suggestion might be accurate, but what Loney knows about offensive line play can not account for most of the Vikings' season-long problems along the offensive line. For the cohesiveness intangible of which Loney speaks can only exist if the players on the line also do the tangible things--like blocking, avoiding senseless penalties, and showing a semblance of positive technique.
Whatever Tice saw in Marcus Johnson and Childress saw in Johnson and Artis Hicks, the Vikings are noticeably stronger along the line with Jason Whittle and even the suspect Mike Rosenthal manning the guard and tackle positions, respectively. That says less about Whittle and Rosenthal, however, than it says about the inadequacies of Johnson and Hicks.
If the Vikings can continue to get remotely serviceable play out of Whittle and Rosenthal, even with the continued poor play of Bryant McKinnie on the left side, they need not worry about Johnson's play at quarterback. The constant on-slaught that Johnson faced prior to the Arizona game--an on-slaught, Childress strongly implied, for which there was no answer along the offensive line--was what created the need for a rolling quarterback. Without the onslaught, Johnson need not worry about constant blindsiding and can resume form as a quarterback unlikely to change the game in either direction.
Suddenly, with changes that could have been made weeks ago, things look a bit closer to what was expected at the beginning of the season. And the offense looks at least reasonably competent, albeit against the likes of the Cardinals. That bodes well for the Vikings, even if the next opponent promises a much stauncher test of the Vikings' offensive line.
Up Next: Looking for Viewing Spots in Bombay. Plus, pre-game (assuming the power doesn't go out and the internet system I find cooperates).
From the outset, two certainities availed themselves with respect to the game's outcome. The first was that, no matter the teams' respective records or on-field performances leading into the game, the Vikings would prevail. And no matter what the Vikings did to assist the Cardinals, Denny Green would do just enough to fall short--just enough to be able to blame the loss on his players rather than on a running attack that featured a mere six rushing attempts.
We knew these two facts at the time that the Vikings' game was scheduled because we knew that the game meant something to Denny. Nothing would have satisfied Green more than to return to the Metrodome and to end the Vikings' modest playoff prospects.
But Denny doesn't win when it matters. And that spelled doom from the outset for the Cardinals. The result was a much needed Vikings' victory that, combined with the continuing inadequacies of enough other NFC teams, gives the Vikings renewed hope for crashing the post-season party.
Offensive Line Shows Up
In the aftermath of Sunday's game, former Vikings' and current Cardinal's offensive line coach Steve Loney commented that the Vikings' offensive line played well. "When things go wrong, the offensive line is an easy target," Loney commented, "mostly because most people don't really understand how an offensive line works."
Loney's point was that an offensive line takes cohesiveness to work. The implication was that the Vikings finally have some offensive line cohesiveness and that that cohesiveness spurred the Vikings' offensive attack.
Loney's suggestion might be accurate, but what Loney knows about offensive line play can not account for most of the Vikings' season-long problems along the offensive line. For the cohesiveness intangible of which Loney speaks can only exist if the players on the line also do the tangible things--like blocking, avoiding senseless penalties, and showing a semblance of positive technique.
Whatever Tice saw in Marcus Johnson and Childress saw in Johnson and Artis Hicks, the Vikings are noticeably stronger along the line with Jason Whittle and even the suspect Mike Rosenthal manning the guard and tackle positions, respectively. That says less about Whittle and Rosenthal, however, than it says about the inadequacies of Johnson and Hicks.
If the Vikings can continue to get remotely serviceable play out of Whittle and Rosenthal, even with the continued poor play of Bryant McKinnie on the left side, they need not worry about Johnson's play at quarterback. The constant on-slaught that Johnson faced prior to the Arizona game--an on-slaught, Childress strongly implied, for which there was no answer along the offensive line--was what created the need for a rolling quarterback. Without the onslaught, Johnson need not worry about constant blindsiding and can resume form as a quarterback unlikely to change the game in either direction.
Suddenly, with changes that could have been made weeks ago, things look a bit closer to what was expected at the beginning of the season. And the offense looks at least reasonably competent, albeit against the likes of the Cardinals. That bodes well for the Vikings, even if the next opponent promises a much stauncher test of the Vikings' offensive line.
Up Next: Looking for Viewing Spots in Bombay. Plus, pre-game (assuming the power doesn't go out and the internet system I find cooperates).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)