Hello everyone, and welcome to the Week 3 Minnesota Vikings postgame roundtable here at Daily Norseman. The Vikes are coming off a nail-biter in Tampa, beating the Bucs 23-16, and remain alone atop the NFC North at 3-0.
Where does the offense go from here? Ostensibly…up, right? How quickly can the Vikings have a Brinks truck backed up to Brian Flores’ house with a lifetime contract and ALLLLL the money?
Question 1: Let’s freestyle for a minute — get your initial thoughts out about the Vikings beating the Bucs in Week 3, 23-16.
Brandon Warne: I feel like a broken record, but damn….it wasn’t pretty. But at the end of the day, a win is a win, and it still kinda feels like a Black-and-Blue Division win against the Bucs, even if there isn’t an NFC Central anymore. Anyone else agree? No?
The offense remains spotty, but I think I’m less worried about it than I usually would be given a few factors that I’ll get into as we progress here. Nobody in the NFC North has looked flawless, and if you weren’t feeling great about beating the Packers, who lost to the Falcons, maybe it feels a bit better to know the boys beat the Bears, who took down the mighty Eagles on Monday Night Football.
Christopher Gates: Thank goodness for Brian Flores, because if that guy wasn’t running this defense and doing absolutely maniacal things to opposing offenses, I don’t know where this team would be right now. The offense is, honestly, a bottom-three offense in the NFL for any number of reasons, but this defense keeps dragging the team to victories somehow. It’s obviously not sustainable over the long term, but it will work against teams like the Buccaneers that are also having issues on offense. They’ll need to pick it up at some point. Are they capable of it? Ehhhhhhhhhhhh…
Warren Ludford: It was a win on the road, so that was great, but it’s frustrating that the offense isn’t playing better. Losing Justin Jefferson after the first drive was more of a game-planning loss than people think. Not only did the Vikings lose their best player on offense, but they also had a game plan built around running the passing game through Jefferson.
So, when he was lost after the first drive, receivers had to be given different roles, and perhaps different plays, etc., and they had to improvise plays they hadn’t practiced during the week, etc., etc. If Jefferson was out all week, they could have come up with a game plan without him, but losing him after the first drive forced them to improvise the rest of the game with stuff the receivers hadn’t practiced.
The Bucs eventually doubled Addison too, and the other receivers didn’t get open much, and there isn’t any chemistry between Murray and them. The Bucs defense is pretty good too, but being down Jefferson (and Jordan Mason) has had an effect.
Craig Williams: Why is it that when this team starts a season great, it never feels good? The offense is obviously worrisome. They also gave up a few big plays on defense. A better team would’ve beaten the Vikings on Sunday.
Shawn C.: Fortunate. But 3-0 is 3-0. But make no mistake: this team has a definite ceiling with the current offense; I don’t care if our defense ends up being the 1985 Bears. It must get fixed. The passing game is anemic by 1970s standards.
Sam Buegler: A win is a win is a win, but oof. That was not a fun watch. Brian Flores, I will personally make sure you never have to buy a drink in Minnesota again, even if it bankrupts me.
Question 2: Who was your Vikings MVP?
BW: I have the benefit of reading everyone’s answers before my own, so how about I go off-script just a little bit…let’s give some love to Johnny Hekker. Sure, he has some name value — inasmuch as a punter can in this day and age outside of Pat McAfee — but to come off the street and punt eight times, average more than 46.0 yards per boot with a couple inside the 20 and a long of more than 60 yards? In a day where the offense was playing like the conditions were similar to a week earlier, I think that has a ton of value.
CG: Who else but Will Reichard? It’s strange not to have an overwhelming sense of dread every time a Minnesota Vikings kicker takes the field, but Reichard has become so automatic that seeing him trot out onto the field is almost comforting at this point. I’m sure there’s absolutely no chance expressing that sentiment will come back to bite me later in any way, shape, or form. Honorable mention to Myles Price, who finally managed a long return and didn’t have it called back by a ridiculous penalty.
WL: I’ll say Will Reichard, although Myles Price or Jordan Addison are contenders too. Reichard had 11 points total, including two field goals from 50+, which made the difference.
CW: Vikings MVP Will Reichard always comes through and was perfect again. The 56-yarder was massive. Eric Wilson had a great day and was saved by a no-call on a facemask.
SC: Could be a handful of players on defense, but I’ll go with Myles Price, as he continues an early-season All-Pro trajectory, and his touchdown won the game for the Vikings.
SB: Reichard. He is the definition of consistency no matter what, and he just proves it again and again. Price also housing the punt was something we have been waiting for, and it was so nice to finally see it happen. But nailing three kicks and a few extra points again forces my hand in giving it to Will the Thrill.
Question 3: Who was your Vikings LVP?
BW: I have a hard time saying anyone else other than Kyler Murray, though I think his performance on the Josh Freeman scale is still only like a 40/100. His accuracy was scattershot, and his wheels saved him from perhaps an even worse day than it already was, but it was functionally his first/only full game with the team on the heels of suffering a concussion early in Week 1. Lord knows we all deserve some grace, but if Murray still looks like this in a couple weeks…we’ve got problems.
CG: It’s Kyler Murray. Yes, it’s one game, and Justin Jefferson got hurt and this and that and whatever. I was told Murray was the “veteran presence” who would help elevate Kevin O’Connell’s offense to the level we saw with Sam Darnold or Kirk Cousins behind center. All I saw was a guy with happy feet, even when the offensive line gave him plenty of time, who seemed scared to use the mobility that was supposed to separate him from other potential options the Vikings had at the position. He was awful on Sunday, no two ways about it.
WL: I’ll go with Josh Metellus. It looked like he gave up the long TD to Ted Hurst, which was big for the Bucs, who otherwise couldn’t generate many points. He’s been the weak link in the secondary so far this season- and that was predictable.
CW: Kyler Murray looked bad in his debut. The OL also struggled. The entire offense outside of Addison, I guess, would be my answer. So KOC?
SC: Kyler Murray. I do think the loss of Justin Jefferson early threw the entire game plan out of whack, but his overall performance was still poor. The numbers are what the numbers are. I expect improvement over the next two weeks. I mean, there has to be, right?
SB: The Vikings’ rushing attack. Aaron Jones had a few good runs, but otherwise no one could get anything going. Dallas and Claiborne combined for three yards. We need to bring in another back, or find a new way to get someone other than Jones going, because we can’t work him the way we did last week. It’s unsustainable.
Question 4: Where do you stand on Kyler Murray right now?
BW: As I said earlier, I’m still cautiously optimistic. If Murray still looks like this in a few weeks, it’s time to start watching some college football to see who we like in the upcoming draft. My early thought? It’s a solid quarterback class and I do like Trinidad Chambliss, age be damned.
CG: I’m not impressed. Anyone who’s been following along for a while will say that I’ve never been impressed with Murray, and they’re right. I don’t think he’s ever been a fit for Kevin O’Connell’s offense, though at this point I don’t know who, exactly, would be. If the Vikings didn’t have him on what amounts to a minimum-wage deal, there wouldn’t be any real upside. I guess all you can do is hope something changes, because O’Connell seems committed to him for this season, barring another injury, but I’m not wildly optimistic.
WL: I’m glad he hit Jefferson over the middle for an explosive early and Addison for a few explosives later on, but the game plan obviously blew when Jefferson left after the first drive, and the passing game largely blew with it. Tai Felton and Jauan Jennings didn’t do much to make up for Jefferson’s loss, and Murray was left holding the ball, oftentimes waiting for receivers to get open. I’m not panicked, but things were clearly out of sync after Jefferson left, and that showed in Murray’s performance. I haven’t drawn any conclusions about Murray at this point, given he’s only really played one game and that without Justin Jefferson after the first drive.
CW: It’s too early to give up, but it looks bad.
SC: Not going to overreact to one full game and 11 snaps, regardless of how bad it was. History says he is a lot, lot, lot better than this and will improve. The greater issue may be KOC and the offensive scheme/game-planning. Lackluster to awful QB play has been the common denominator over nearly an entire season of games and four different signal callers, including two proven veterans in Wentz and Murray.
SB: It was his first full game back from concussion. He looked rusty, but also showed flashes of why we brought him in. If this was his fifth or sixth game of the season, I would be more concerned, but I think KOC can get ready for hopefully a big game against Miami.
Question 5: Which of the team’s three (update: now two!) quarterbacks do you think right now is best equipped to run this offense?
(Editor’s note: I left these answers as they were submitted before the J.J. McCarthy trade, because I think in context it still makes sense to see if anyone still believes/believed. Keep reading to find out!)
BW: My answer right now is Murray, but it may change within a couple of weeks. I don’t think Wentz is a miracle worker, but he’s elusive enough to not get absolutely murdered in the pocket like some former Vikings quarterbacks and I still believe he can be more accurate if he simply gets in-game reps. With that said, speaking of former Vikings quarterbacks….John Spytek, you up? (Kidding. Mostly.)
CG: Again, I’m biased, but it’s probably J.J. McCarthy. Honestly, if you’re not going to take advantage of Murray’s mobility and you’re going to at least try to be a run-heavy offense…well, that’s the sort of offense you said you wanted to have when you drafted McCarthy in the first place. McCarthy is the only quarterback on the roster under contract beyond this season, so you should probably at least try to do something with him, particularly if Murray continues to look as bad as he did against Tampa Bay. Of course, I don’t think O’Connell has any desire to do that, so I’m just talking to the proverbial wall on that front, I’m afraid.
WL: Murray and it’s not close. Wentz has limitations in the passing game that limit explosives, and McCarthy still has significant problems with accuracy and processing, last we saw him play. Murray is still figuring things out, and losing Jefferson after the first drive didn’t help. It will take time for him to get comfortable in the new scheme, but he showed he can make plays. After a few more games with Jefferson in the mix, we’ll get a better idea of what Murray is going to be. That half roll-out and throw to Jefferson on the dig route to start the game is something I expect to see more of going forward when Jefferson returns.
CW: Slim pickings. Right now, JJ McCarthy can do just as well as Wentz or Murray. Murray needs more time; 1 game isn’t the end, but he needs to improve to justify keeping his starting spot.
SC: Right now, Kyler Murray. Precedent says he’s simply the most proven, talented, and dynamic of the bunch right now. But he has to improve quickly. Two more games like yesterday heading into the bye, and it may justify a switch. I haven’t given up on J.J. McCarthy, dammit! That said, KOC may look to Wentz for the lower ceiling but higher floor. We just need competence with this defense. Who is most likely to consistently hit 21-24 points? Personally, I’d give McCarthy the shot if the situation arises, but, of course, my opinion is meaningless.
SB: I will still stick with Kyler. The offense has been designed with him in mind; his mobility and escapability are huge. Wentz might have been a bit more consistent if he was in, but he also might have been sacked more times. So, until we get a larger sample size, I will stick with K1.