The Failure of the Return Game

One of the problems with Brad Childress’ plan to win with defense, field position, the running game and the occasional big play was he forgot one of the most important components of field position: special teams. And I’m not just talking about the punt coverage. The Vikings had one of the worst return games in the NFL, barely presenting any threat to break a big play on a punt or kick return. It was pretty clear which team had put some thought into improving their return game last off season on Sunday, with DeSean Jackson racking up 109 punt return yards, including a 62 and 30 yard return, to the Vikings 1 return yard.

The stats for the season are equally bleak. The Vikings had only three kick returns longer than 40 yards, with their longest return being a 49 yarder by Darius Reynaud against Chicago in the Metrodome (he also had one of the other returns longer than 40 yards the next week against Detroit). They were one of only six NFL teams without a return of 50 yards or more. Their punt return game was equally bad. They led the NFL in fair catches, with 23. That means, of the 57 times a Vikings’ player caught a punt, they called for a fair catch 40% of the time. If you’re looking for a reason why the Purple only had four punt returns of more than 20 yards, and only one of more than 40 (Bernard Berrian’s 82 yard return for a touchdown), that’s probably the most likely.

There were a myriad of reasons for the Vikings’ futility. The first was Aundrae Allison’s failure to repeat his 2007 performance as a kick returner. In the first two games, he averaged 17.3 yards on three returns, with his longest return being 22 yards. At that point, the Vikings tried Chester Taylor, but he wasn’t much better. They tried Charles Gordon, who, while explosive (he had a return of 42 yards), got hurt. Then they tried veteran returner Maurice Hicks, who also wasn’t much better, but since he had no other role and he was a veteran, he stuck as the primary returner, returning 29 kicks. And he was bad. He averaged 23.8 yards per return, with only 7 returns of more than 30 yards. Basically what I expected. Darius Reynaud looked like he might turn into a quality returner, but he got hurt, which lead to more Hicks and even more poor kick off returns.

The Vikings' basically had the same problem at punt returner. They tried Aundrae Allison, but he was about as bad returning punts as kickoffs. They tried Charles Gordon, who, prior to getting hurt, averaged 4.4 yards per return while calling for 11 fair catches on 26 punts. They tried Bobby Wade and Bernard Berrian, neither of whom they wanted returning punts, since they're the Vikings' top two receivers. The two of them at least averaged more than ten yards per return, but Wade called for a fair catch on 50% of his punts, and while Berrian returned a punt 82 yards for a touchdown, he called for a fair catch on 42% of the punts he received.

Field position matters, especially when you have an offense built on running and short passes, like the Vikings. And the Vikings inability to find anything but mediocre punt and kick returners means that they had to go even further on each drive, something their offense just isn't equipped to do. The Purple averaged 29 yards per drive this year (according to Football Outsiders), which means that the difference between a fair catch at their own 30 yard line and a ten yard punt return to the 40 yard line was the difference between a punt and a field goal. And if that happened just once, it'd be the difference between the Vikings' being 12th in points per game and 3rd. With the Purple's defense, three points is a lot. And starting out with good field position may have been the difference in the playoffs, something we'll never know, since the Purple's return men never provided them with that luxury.

[I'm going to be out of town until Tuesday, so don't expect too many posts until then. I'll try and get something up, but my plans for what I'm going to do when traveling and what actually happens rarely seems to match up]

The Chargers Through Their Last Three Games

Just a few weeks ago, the Vikings game against the Chargers looked very winnable. After four weeks, they were projected to finish under .500 and had absorbed some ugly losses. Now, they look like one of the best teams in the NFL and a likely playoff team.

After getting handled by the Chiefs in San Diego, the Chargers have finally started to play up to their talent. They're now in the top 5 in DVOA, are 9th in offensive DVOA and are 14th in defensive DVOA. They've won their last three games by a combined score of 104-27. Neither the bye week nor the wildfires could slow them down.

While Houston, Oakland and Denver all have worse defenses than the Vikings by DVOA. Only Oakland has a better pass defense than the Vikings, and none of them stop the run as well as the Vikings (you already knew that though).

Offensively, the Vikings are about as good at throwing the ball as Houston and Oakland, which is to say, that Houston and Oakland suck at throwing as well. Tarvaris Jackson will be back under center on Sunday, but will likely be without his leading receiver, Bobby Wade. That should mean more running plays, hopefully, which means more Purple Jesus and more Chester Taylor and hopefully more success. The Vikings will only be the second team the Chargers have faced this year with a potent rushing attack (New England being the other). It might not be enough to generate some offense for the Purple, but it's a reason to hope, which is better than nothing.

The Chargers took a little time to adjust to Norv Turner, but based on their last three games, they seem to have finally got it. That doesn't bode well for the Vikings, seeing as how the Chargers are amongst the most talented teams in the NFL.

[Tomorrow, I'll have more on Sunday's game, including a baseless, optimistic prediction, as well as thoughts on Bollinger v. Jackson and why Phillip Rivers might just be the difference maker in a Vikings win...]

The Rebuilding of the Receiving Corp

The Vikings finally inked their first free agent that didn't come with a pronunciation guide last night, signing Bobby Wade, formerly of the Tennessee Titans, for five years and $15 million. Wade had something of a break out year last season, finishing second on the team with 33 receptions for 461 yards. While the totals don't seem all that impressive, they're deceptive.

First off, the Titans were starting a rookie Vince Young, at quarterback (Yes, he was Rookie of the Year, but he was still a rookie) . Jeff Fisher is an intelligent coach--he wasn't going to put the focus on his brand new franchise quarterback. The Titans ran the ball about half the time and had the fifth lowest passing attempts in the NFL. And Vince Young finished with the worst completion percentage in the NFL, at 51.5% (and I wonder how he's going to do now that his top two receivers have gone elsewhere?)

Secondly, as I mentioned yesterday, Wade added a lot of value to the Titans. He contributed 11.1 DPAR, which was 1.5 more than the Vikings leading receiver. The reason he was able to do so was because of what he did with his limited receptions. His 14.9% DVOA was the 19th best in the NFL. Both of these totals were better than Drew Bennett's, who had 6.6 DPAR and -4.5% DVOA. Wade even has a decent catch percentage, as he hauled in 57% of the passes thrown to him, which puts him somewhere in the middle of the pack for wide receivers. For example, he would have been behind Travis Taylor (65%) but ahead of Marcus Robinson (50%) on the Vikings last year. When using that stat, one must also remember that it does not attempt to decide where the fault for the incompletion lies, and Wade was playing with the most inaccurate quarterback in the NFL.

So while Wade's statistics may not be all that impressive by themselves, when taken in context, they show a receiver who will be an upgrade over any of the wide outs from last season. His addition is a good first step for the Vikings as they attempt to provide Tarvaris Jackson with someone to throw to.