AP - Why was he in with 7+ minutes to go? (1 Viewer)

[Ozymandias]

The lead was perfectly safe with Lovie Smith on the other sidelines. He's the one who think you try to run it 4 times from the 1 yard line against the 2nd toughest run defense.

 

[ScottyFargo]

The lead was perfectly safe with Lovie Smith on the other sidelines. He's the one who think you try to run it 4 times from the 1 yard line against the 2nd toughest run defense.

He and Childress are too cute for their own good.

 

[BigDave]

I know coaches want to WIN at all costs, that's what they're judged on, even at the expense of the health of their top players.

But the reason I asked the question in the first place was that it seems to me that lately coaches don't care about the next game. They are too into the moment during a game and are concerned about that game only. They come out after the game and state "so and so is dinged up blablabla and they should be OK next week". We've seen many players get beaten down this year and others because of that mentality.

I also put some blame on the players, who don't want to show weakness or injury and give up plays. In addition, the assistant coaches are probably afraid to speak up in this regard.

Who makes that decision, head coach, position coach trainers or a combo of all three? Any ex NFL coaches on this board that can shed some light on these decisions?

 

[JohnnyU]

Without reading any posts in this thread, a 17 pt lead isn't safe with 7+ minutes to go.

 

[Henry Cabbot Henhouse]

Without reading any posts in this thread, a 17 pt lead isn't save with 7+ minutes to go.

We have decided that logic and reason take a back seat to wild speculation and fantasy football perspective in this thread.Try to keep up.

 

[treat88]

Without reading any posts in this thread, a 17 pt lead isn't save with 7+ minutes to go.

Depends on context. This one was safe.Miracles happen, but they are called miracles for a reason.

 

[gianmarco]

They weren't going to score 17 pts on one drive. If they make it close with a quick score, THEN put AP back in there.

 

[ScottyFargo]

They weren't going to score 17 pts on one drive. If they make it close with a quick score, THEN put AP back in there.

I don't understand what is so difficult about understanding that line of thinking. It's not like the defense didn't shut the bears down on a GOAL LINE STAND and create multiple turnovers in this game. Sheesh.

 

[Das Boot]

Taylor is fully capable of holding down the fort and moving the chains.

It was flat out foolish to risk ADP in that situation.

 

[CalBear]

Saying 'there were still 7 minutes in the game, their pass D is bad', or 'you have Adrian Peterson to put away the game' isn't looking at all the facts in this particular situation. As has already been pointed out, they started that drive in easy field goal range and were already up by 3 scores. Peterson was clearly beat up.

A field goal doesn't help you at all; you're up by 17, so at 20 it's still a three-score game. You need a first down to keep the clock running (8 minutes is a long time), and a TD to put the game out of reach. They got the first down with Peterson; they may or may not have gotten it with Taylor. That's why you give your best player the ball in that situation.

 

[Das Boot]

Saying 'there were still 7 minutes in the game, their pass D is bad', or 'you have Adrian Peterson to put away the game' isn't looking at all the facts in this particular situation. As has already been pointed out, they started that drive in easy field goal range and were already up by 3 scores. Peterson was clearly beat up.

A field goal doesn't help you at all; you're up by 17, so at 20 it's still a three-score game. You need a first down to keep the clock running (8 minutes is a long time), and a TD to put the game out of reach. They got the first down with Peterson; they may or may not have gotten it with Taylor. That's why you give your best player the ball in that situation.

A FG is quite important in that situation, it would push it to needing 3 TDs to win, not 2 TDs and a FG.

 

[FFdork]

Saying 'there were still 7 minutes in the game, their pass D is bad', or 'you have Adrian Peterson to put away the game' isn't looking at all the facts in this particular situation. As has already been pointed out, they started that drive in easy field goal range and were already up by 3 scores. Peterson was clearly beat up.

A field goal doesn't help you at all; you're up by 17, so at 20 it's still a three-score game. You need a first down to keep the clock running (8 minutes is a long time), and a TD to put the game out of reach. They got the first down with Peterson; they may or may not have gotten it with Taylor. That's why you give your best player the ball in that situation.

I disagree that a FG doesn't help at all and they were pretty much conceding that they were going to take it.Look, I think anyone in this thread being reasonable can understand there is a rationale for having Peterson in at that point in the game, but to me your argument just doesn't take in the totality of the situation. I could completely understand if it was the playoffs, a game against a team that didn't look completely beaten, or even IF HE WASN'T REPEATEDLY LIMPING OFF THE FIELD. Sorry to be a broken record, but I think this is the most important aspect--if Peterson still looked fresh and healthy there might still be a little grumbling about having him in, but under the circumstances it just seemed foolish. If Peterson aggravates whatever was bothering him or sustains some other injury where he misses time, the season is over and there is a Childress lynch mob at Vikings HQ the next day.

Plus, given where the drive started and the fact that they ran the ball every down, IMO they weren't making a legit try to score a TD. As has been pointed out over and over here, if you're basically going to run clock and take the FG, do it with the fresh, healthy legs of Taylor. If the Bears, who mind you were playing terrible, somehow manage to fly down the field to get it to 13, you can always bring Peterson back in at that point.

 

[Chaka]

Saying 'there were still 7 minutes in the game, their pass D is bad', or 'you have Adrian Peterson to put away the game' isn't looking at all the facts in this particular situation. As has already been pointed out, they started that drive in easy field goal range and were already up by 3 scores. Peterson was clearly beat up.

A field goal doesn't help you at all; you're up by 17, so at 20 it's still a three-score game. You need a first down to keep the clock running (8 minutes is a long time), and a TD to put the game out of reach. They got the first down with Peterson; they may or may not have gotten it with Taylor. That's why you give your best player the ball in that situation.

I disagree that a FG doesn't help at all and they were pretty much conceding that they were going to take it.Look, I think anyone in this thread being reasonable can understand there is a rationale for having Peterson in at that point in the game, but to me your argument just doesn't take in the totality of the situation. I could completely understand if it was the playoffs, a game against a team that didn't look completely beaten, or even IF HE WASN'T REPEATEDLY LIMPING OFF THE FIELD. Sorry to be a broken record, but I think this is the most important aspect--if Peterson still looked fresh and healthy there might still be a little grumbling about having him in, but under the circumstances it just seemed foolish. If Peterson aggravates whatever was bothering him or sustains some other injury where he misses time, the season is over and there is a Childress lynch mob at Vikings HQ the next day.

Plus, given where the drive started and the fact that they ran the ball every down, IMO they weren't making a legit try to score a TD. As has been pointed out over and over here, if you're basically going to run clock and take the FG, do it with the fresh, healthy legs of Taylor. If the Bears, who mind you were playing terrible, somehow manage to fly down the field to get it to 13, you can always bring Peterson back in at that point.

If you want to look at the "totality of the situation" then you must accept that this was effectively a playoff game for the Vikings. You take him out after you are 100% certain you are going to win not 80% or 90% or even 99.9999999% certain. You worry about next week after this week is over not with 7 minutes left in the 4th quarter.A TD guarantees that win, a FG does too but you cannot presume that a FG attempt will be made simply because it is in range.

AP>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>C.Taylor

Childress made the right call.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Saying 'there were still 7 minutes in the game, their pass D is bad', or 'you have Adrian Peterson to put away the game' isn't looking at all the facts in this particular situation. As has already been pointed out, they started that drive in easy field goal range and were already up by 3 scores. Peterson was clearly beat up.

A field goal doesn't help you at all; you're up by 17, so at 20 it's still a three-score game. You need a first down to keep the clock running (8 minutes is a long time), and a TD to put the game out of reach. They got the first down with Peterson; they may or may not have gotten it with Taylor. That's why you give your best player the ball in that situation.

I disagree that a FG doesn't help at all and they were pretty much conceding that they were going to take it.Look, I think anyone in this thread being reasonable can understand there is a rationale for having Peterson in at that point in the game, but to me your argument just doesn't take in the totality of the situation. I could completely understand if it was the playoffs, a game against a team that didn't look completely beaten, or even IF HE WASN'T REPEATEDLY LIMPING OFF THE FIELD. Sorry to be a broken record, but I think this is the most important aspect--if Peterson still looked fresh and healthy there might still be a little grumbling about having him in, but under the circumstances it just seemed foolish. If Peterson aggravates whatever was bothering him or sustains some other injury where he misses time, the season is over and there is a Childress lynch mob at Vikings HQ the next day.

Plus, given where the drive started and the fact that they ran the ball every down, IMO they weren't making a legit try to score a TD. As has been pointed out over and over here, if you're basically going to run clock and take the FG, do it with the fresh, healthy legs of Taylor. If the Bears, who mind you were playing terrible, somehow manage to fly down the field to get it to 13, you can always bring Peterson back in at that point.

If you want to look at the "totality of the situation" then you must accept that this was effectively a playoff game for the Vikings. You take him out after you are 100% certain you are going to win not 80% or 90% or even 99.9999999% certain. You worry about next week after this week is over not with 7 minutes left in the 4th quarter.A TD guarantees that win, a FG does too but you cannot presume that a FG attempt will be made simply because it is in range.

AP>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>C.Taylor

Childress made the right call.

Chester has broken off some large runs behind Steve Hutchinson as well, but I can respect that opinion based on how important the game was. Personally, Peterson looked a little haggard by the end of the night and it still seems like a greater risk to the payoff.

 

[Chaka]

Win first, then worry.

 

[Synthesizer]

Childress should be starting Chester Taylor. He's a good RB plus that would keep A.Peterson extra healthy for the long playoff run the Vikings are guaranteed to start in a few weeks. I could see a 95/5 split in favor of Chester just to unleash the beast a few times each game.

 

[FFdork]

Saying 'there were still 7 minutes in the game, their pass D is bad', or 'you have Adrian Peterson to put away the game' isn't looking at all the facts in this particular situation. As has already been pointed out, they started that drive in easy field goal range and were already up by 3 scores. Peterson was clearly beat up.

A field goal doesn't help you at all; you're up by 17, so at 20 it's still a three-score game. You need a first down to keep the clock running (8 minutes is a long time), and a TD to put the game out of reach. They got the first down with Peterson; they may or may not have gotten it with Taylor. That's why you give your best player the ball in that situation.

I disagree that a FG doesn't help at all and they were pretty much conceding that they were going to take it.Look, I think anyone in this thread being reasonable can understand there is a rationale for having Peterson in at that point in the game, but to me your argument just doesn't take in the totality of the situation. I could completely understand if it was the playoffs, a game against a team that didn't look completely beaten, or even IF HE WASN'T REPEATEDLY LIMPING OFF THE FIELD. Sorry to be a broken record, but I think this is the most important aspect--if Peterson still looked fresh and healthy there might still be a little grumbling about having him in, but under the circumstances it just seemed foolish. If Peterson aggravates whatever was bothering him or sustains some other injury where he misses time, the season is over and there is a Childress lynch mob at Vikings HQ the next day.

Plus, given where the drive started and the fact that they ran the ball every down, IMO they weren't making a legit try to score a TD. As has been pointed out over and over here, if you're basically going to run clock and take the FG, do it with the fresh, healthy legs of Taylor. If the Bears, who mind you were playing terrible, somehow manage to fly down the field to get it to 13, you can always bring Peterson back in at that point.

If you want to look at the "totality of the situation" then you must accept that this was effectively a playoff game for the Vikings. You take him out after you are 100% certain you are going to win not 80% or 90% or even 99.9999999% certain. You worry about next week after this week is over not with 7 minutes left in the 4th quarter.A TD guarantees that win, a FG does too but you cannot presume that a FG attempt will be made simply because it is in range.

AP>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>C.Taylor

Childress made the right call.

1. If you're only 80% certain to win then yes your best player should be in there IF HE'S HEALTHY, which he did not appear to be. However, I would put it the odds at at least 95% certain at that juncture in the game. I can certainly understand the mentality was win first then worry about the next game, but NFL head coaches get paid the big bucks to weigh that against your overall goals as a team. The big picture was risking your gimpy franchise player when the game was all but over. Plus the reality is that the Vikings are going to have several more must win games where they will need ADP that much more, especially if the Williams wall gets suspended for even 1 game.2. I think talking about trying to score the TD there is irrelevant b/c they weren't really trying to score a TD. I'm sure they wouldn't have minded scoring one, but they were going to be content to run as much clock as possible and take a field goal. If you feel a TD is so friggin' important at that point, then throw in a 2nd down play action pass or something less predictable.

3. Yes ADP>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>C. Taylor under normal circumstances. However, Taylor looked fresh and Peterson looked worn down and gimpy.

OK. Last post for me. It's all academic at this point, and I seem to remember some saying about arguing on the internet.

 

[Ozymandias]

Childress should be starting Chester Taylor. He's a good RB plus that would keep A.Peterson extra healthy for the long playoff run the Vikings are guaranteed to start in a few weeks. I could see a 95/5 split in favor of Chester just to unleash the beast a few times each game.

It would make much more sense to save him for the Superbowl. Let Chester absorb the pounding, and then unleash The Beast in the Superbowl.

 

[Chaka]

Saying 'there were still 7 minutes in the game, their pass D is bad', or 'you have Adrian Peterson to put away the game' isn't looking at all the facts in this particular situation. As has already been pointed out, they started that drive in easy field goal range and were already up by 3 scores. Peterson was clearly beat up.

A field goal doesn't help you at all; you're up by 17, so at 20 it's still a three-score game. You need a first down to keep the clock running (8 minutes is a long time), and a TD to put the game out of reach. They got the first down with Peterson; they may or may not have gotten it with Taylor. That's why you give your best player the ball in that situation.

I disagree that a FG doesn't help at all and they were pretty much conceding that they were going to take it.Look, I think anyone in this thread being reasonable can understand there is a rationale for having Peterson in at that point in the game, but to me your argument just doesn't take in the totality of the situation. I could completely understand if it was the playoffs, a game against a team that didn't look completely beaten, or even IF HE WASN'T REPEATEDLY LIMPING OFF THE FIELD. Sorry to be a broken record, but I think this is the most important aspect--if Peterson still looked fresh and healthy there might still be a little grumbling about having him in, but under the circumstances it just seemed foolish. If Peterson aggravates whatever was bothering him or sustains some other injury where he misses time, the season is over and there is a Childress lynch mob at Vikings HQ the next day.

Plus, given where the drive started and the fact that they ran the ball every down, IMO they weren't making a legit try to score a TD. As has been pointed out over and over here, if you're basically going to run clock and take the FG, do it with the fresh, healthy legs of Taylor. If the Bears, who mind you were playing terrible, somehow manage to fly down the field to get it to 13, you can always bring Peterson back in at that point.

If you want to look at the "totality of the situation" then you must accept that this was effectively a playoff game for the Vikings. You take him out after you are 100% certain you are going to win not 80% or 90% or even 99.9999999% certain. You worry about next week after this week is over not with 7 minutes left in the 4th quarter.A TD guarantees that win, a FG does too but you cannot presume that a FG attempt will be made simply because it is in range.

AP>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>C.Taylor

Childress made the right call.

1. If you're only 80% certain to win then yes your best player should be in there IF HE'S HEALTHY, which he did not appear to be. However, I would put it the odds at at least 95% certain at that juncture in the game. I can certainly understand the mentality was win first then worry about the next game, but NFL head coaches get paid the big bucks to weigh that against your overall goals as a team. The big picture was risking your gimpy franchise player when the game was all but over. Plus the reality is that the Vikings are going to have several more must win games where they will need ADP that much more, especially if the Williams wall gets suspended for even 1 game.2. I think talking about trying to score the TD there is irrelevant b/c they weren't really trying to score a TD. I'm sure they wouldn't have minded scoring one, but they were going to be content to run as much clock as possible and take a field goal. If you feel a TD is so friggin' important at that point, then throw in a 2nd down play action pass or something less predictable.

3. Yes ADP>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>C. Taylor under normal circumstances. However, Taylor looked fresh and Peterson looked worn down and gimpy.

OK. Last post for me. It's all academic at this point, and I seem to remember some saying about arguing on the internet.

5% is too large of a margin for error.You are right that chewing time off the clock was the primary goal at that point (and the part about arguing on the internet too).

ADP at 80%>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>C.Taylor