Some Perspective

I never really had an issue with how the offense performed against the Vikings for the most part. My gripe was in which the manner of how we lost the game itself.

I thought our offense did a great job of dominating TOP and moving the ball extremely well against a very tough Vikings D. Sure. It's always better to be able to put it in for 7, but to go into halftime up 10-0, I had 0 complaints. I think you'll see most fans just had the issue with how our offense, mainly MM lost the game with 3
Turnovers in a span of about 5-6 minutes, including two for 14'pointd, forcing our offense to go back into a pass first, 4-5 wide set.

The play calling is going to be interesting from here on out. On one hand, you have a coach who is set on smash mouth running football, which is fine with me, but we also saw in the Lions game when MM is able to get into a grove by calling no huddle, rather quick moving pass plays. You have to somehow find the balance there. Whether it be no huddle for 4-5 plays and let MM spread out the D with solid short to medium range passes, then quickly formation sub and bring in more of the big boys, and change the style completely to a more run first, play action roll out as a second option.

 

we still gave the game away but I more or less accept your conclusion

 

It was definitely the TOs that cost the game.
But your count is off if you want Mariota to take the blame. The INT was all on Mariota, no argument there.
The fumbled hand off to Murray might be on him, even though he took responsibility. The zone read hand off can be tricky, and Murray struggled with it in Philly too. It hasn't been his game in the past. Maybe Mariota can help him with it.

But the 3rd one was all Murray. Mariota had nothing to do with that one.

 

I wasn't meaning to say all three were on MM, just was trying to state that a huge part of losing that game was on MM. Al I was trying to get at there.

 

The Int came on a terribly designed play folks. We ran the basic run version of the play this week. Just a IZ to the boundary.

Backside defender always coming down to kill the QB. Block em with a slot WR. We'll be fine.

 

Bad decision to throw it. Put in that position tho.

 

The Packers also put the entire game plan on Rodgers' shoulders every week. Mariota is a glorified hander offer until the circumstances in the game dictate that we let him play QB.

Down with Robiskie. Down with Mularkey.

 

Yep. Even if this Vikes D is 85 Bears level we still gave the game away. The awful INT and even sillier fumbled handoff were more about the Titans than the Vikings.

 

I think the INT is somewhat forgivable because he's still a young QB on a bad play design. He shouldn't have thrown it, but he was about to get crushed and he's trying to make a play. I think the INT is more of a good Vikings play.

The fumbled handoff was all Titans. It looked like Murray thought MM was going to keep it then they both ran away from the ball as if the other had it. Very 3 Stooges like.