Posted this in the NFC North thread, but I enjoy discussing things with people outside of the NFC North fans too of course. GSDOUBLEU I got you.
I have a lot of thoughts on the game, don't know if I really want to elaborate on them. I want to see the team in Week 2 to know if my assertions are premature or dead-on but just to throw these few things out there, why are people crediting the Vikings deficit as the game wore on for the reason Adrian Peterson didn't get the snaps and carries? Third-down blocking, right?
Okay, well why just four first-half carries? How does that go along with 'the narrative'?
The deficit wasn't big at all then during that period of time, and I actually think we hurt ourselves the more we tried to pass even when down due to how TERRIBLE the middle of the offensive line was throughout the entirety of the game. Joe Berger was terrible, Mike Harris was terrible, and then on the right side of the line, T.J. Clemmings. My god, what an atrocity against San Fran.
On one hand, you could say Mike Zimmer and Norv Turner didn't have any idea what the Niners, under Jim Tomsula, were going to look like, what they would throw at Minnesota.
1.) Tomsula is BRED on the defensive line. Of course they were going to overload the line that was decimated all of last year with pressure and bring Bridgewater to the ground as nearly every team did last year. Whether you can confidently plan your offense for that because you don't know for certain until you see that is one thing, but to totally look flummoxed by it all game was pretty disappointing and makes me think a lot lower of Norv Turner in general.
2.) For any argument you can make that you 'don't know what the Niners philosophy under Jim Tomsula will be' you could say, 'Well, the Niners didn't know what philosophy to expect with the Adrian Peterson element in the offense under Zimmer/Turner because nobody except the St. Louis Rams in one, measly game, had seen that before under this specific coaching staff. For how good of a career AP has had, Year 2 of Teddy Bridgewater had plenty of steam coming into it (don't get me started on that...)... so would we be passing to set up the run for a 30-year-old RB or running with a 30-year-old RB to set up the pass for our sophomore QB? I think there was a legitimate mystery to that question coming in, and apparently it didn't confuse Tomsula in the way Tomsula confused Zimmer and Norv.
Half of Peterson's carries went for one yard or less.
Zero of Peterson's carries were of double-digit yardage.
He played in just 64.3% of the team's snaps, when he's averaged between 70-75% for his career. A 5-10% dropoff is considerable.
Please don't come in here with any weak takes like 'Well maybe Minnesota's bringing Peterson on gradually and working him back into form...' DO THAT IN THE PRESEASON, because we had five games of that type to get him back into form when the results DON'T matter. So if that is the case - which I think it's not - get that done then. I don't care about keeping him fresh for the regular season when he comes out of the gate averaging 3.1 yards per carry.
If it wasn't Kenneth Acker's tackle in the first half that made Adrian Peterson's snaps fall like that, and they're not just keeping an injury to his knee or something under wraps so the upcoming opponents aren't looking for a bullseye to target, then I don't know what the ****'s going on.