Sandwiched between two playoff years, the final two under Bud Grant, Vikes start out 0-2. They lose opener at Tampa that’s nothing to be ashamed of (they would win division) but then get blown away at home on a Monday Night to a now-unspectacular Raider squad. They then win five straight, ending that streak with wins at SD (a great game) and at home vs undefeated Eagles. Then they lose two in a row (@StL, @Den) followed by winning two straight, the first of those two revenge on TB. 7-4 they were coming around the final bend only to lose 5-straight, all of them non-playoff teams (although Det & KC were quite respectable non-qualifiers).
So what was it that happened? Was it the too many pass-attempts (a record until broken by 4-12 Lions in 2012) that was the main culprit? Before that collapse, and following the slow start, they looked at times to be Grant’s best Viking team since those deep ’70s playoff runs.
’81 Vikings - what happened?
-
L.C. Greenwood
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 8:53 am
Re: ’81 Vikings - what happened?
22 points scored in their last three losses was an issue, but the Minnesota defense also declined from their 70s standard. I do remember they had a tight end from that era, named Joe Sensor, who had a great season, but had his career ended by a knee injury.74_75_78_79_ wrote:Sandwiched between two playoff years, the final two under Bud Grant, Vikes start out 0-2. They lose opener at Tampa that’s nothing to be ashamed of (they would win division) but then get blown away at home on a Monday Night to a now-unspectacular Raider squad. They then win five straight, ending that streak with wins at SD (a great game) and at home vs undefeated Eagles. Then they lose two in a row (@StL, @Den) followed by winning two straight, the first of those two revenge on TB. 7-4 they were coming around the final bend only to lose 5-straight, all of them non-playoff teams (although Det & KC were quite respectable non-qualifiers).
So what was it that happened? Was it the too many pass-attempts (a record until broken by 4-12 Lions in 2012) that was the main culprit? Before that collapse, and following the slow start, they looked at times to be Grant’s best Viking team since those deep ’70s playoff runs.
-
BD Sullivan
- Posts: 2318
- Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:30 pm
Re: ’81 Vikings - what happened?
They lost by a point to both Atlanta (31-30) and Chicago (10-9), and they fell to KC, 10-6.
*The Falcons loss was as a favorite on a MNF road game, which was usually prime upset territory. The Vikes did have a 21-7 lead at the half, but Atlanta still had slim WC hopes. The second half saw Kramer throw three of his four picks (including the clinching pick-six) and Ted Brown only gained seven yards after halftime--following a 101-yard first half.
*The Bears defense shut down the Vikes--less than 300 yards total and 38 on the ground--compared to 175 between Payton and Suhey. With just over two minutes left, the Vikes trailed 10-7 when Kramer hit a wide-open Rashad at the 50. Rashad got down to the Chicago 14 when Jeff Fisher forced a fumble and the Bears recovered at their four--They eventually took a late safety.
*The Chiefs game was the last game at the Met, with the Vikes getting down to the KC three-yard-line in the final moments.
Other notes:
--Minnesota played Oakland in Week 2, with the Raiders coming off their second Super Bowl win.
--Kramer had hurt his knee in the Denver MNF loss and admitted just after the Chiefs game that it hadn't fully recovered.
--Ron Yary and Jeff Siemon took some shots at some teammates for a lack of dedication.
*The Falcons loss was as a favorite on a MNF road game, which was usually prime upset territory. The Vikes did have a 21-7 lead at the half, but Atlanta still had slim WC hopes. The second half saw Kramer throw three of his four picks (including the clinching pick-six) and Ted Brown only gained seven yards after halftime--following a 101-yard first half.
*The Bears defense shut down the Vikes--less than 300 yards total and 38 on the ground--compared to 175 between Payton and Suhey. With just over two minutes left, the Vikes trailed 10-7 when Kramer hit a wide-open Rashad at the 50. Rashad got down to the Chicago 14 when Jeff Fisher forced a fumble and the Bears recovered at their four--They eventually took a late safety.
*The Chiefs game was the last game at the Met, with the Vikes getting down to the KC three-yard-line in the final moments.
Other notes:
--Minnesota played Oakland in Week 2, with the Raiders coming off their second Super Bowl win.
--Kramer had hurt his knee in the Denver MNF loss and admitted just after the Chiefs game that it hadn't fully recovered.
--Ron Yary and Jeff Siemon took some shots at some teammates for a lack of dedication.
Re: ’81 Vikings - what happened?
Yeah, I lived through this one as a 12-year-old Vikings fan back in 1981. I subscribed to Bob Lurtsema's Viking Report during that time, so I guess I had as much in-depth feedback as anyone.
Some thoughts:
-- For years, the Vikings had drafted offensive linemen who were not physically overpowering and just did not develop into real hole-makers. When you saw them walk up the line of scrimmage, they looked small, slow, and kind of weak. Tim Irwin was the first guy they drafted in a long time with a real physical presence, and it took him a while to get his bearing in the league. So the running game was a constant weakness that they needed to cover up. Was it Bill Parcells or John Madden or some other coach who said "Come December, you need to be able to run the football." The Vikings had not been able to do this for years, and it was painfully apparent in 1981.
-- Combined with a below-average offensive line, the Vikings also couldn't find a speed back with breakaway presence. Any runs over 10 yards were very rare. Ted Brown, Rickey Young and others had their strengths as smart players with good hands to catch passes, and low fumble rates, but were not game-breakers. Jarvis Redwine gave me hope when they drafted him, but he did not develop.
-- Sammy White gave the team some "stretch the field" dimension, but this was a nickel and dime offense (West Coast offense per se) geared toward short passes to the RBs, and Rashad and Senser. I think that Terry LeCount actually scared some people as he had a knack for the big play, but he was dealing with substance abuse issues that likely affected his consistency (source: http://jacksonville.com/sports/college/ ... ack-school). So, back to the offense, all the emphasis on short passes sometimes meant balls were thrown into high-traffic areas, leading to tipped passes and spates of interceptions.
-- After Kramer came back from missing the first two games, the five-game winning streak was too much too soon for this team, in my opinion. Beating San Diego (incredible finish to that one) and absolutely throttling unbeaten Philadelphia I think got the Vikings way too full of themselves. Kramer was all over the media as this dashing "Two-Minute Tommy" persona (he made the cover of the Sporting News during that time, which was not as big as Sports Illustrated, but still a significant honor to be on the cover of a national sports weekly) who was saving the team from its 0-2 start, and he was a young guy with a glamour poster that was a hot seller in Minneapolis, and his interest in the night life has been well documented with repeated issues with alcohol.
-- Kramer also had a lot of bravado, with a sort of tic that he constantly pulled at his facemask when talking to the refs. It was kind of an odd motion, but made him look spirited and feisty. The problem with that is you when you do that and throw a pick, it looks like false machismo. He suffered 14 interceptions in the last five games, not all his fault, but the cumulative effect sent the team rolling downhill in my opinion as they gradually realized that beating SD and Philly did not mean that other teams would roll over for them.
-- Going into the Atlanta Monday Night game, they were 7-4 with a two-game lead in the NFC Central with five games to play. But losing to the Falcons really shook the team, I think. I remember watching that one on MNF, and the Vikings had some crazy long plays in the first half (one where Brown reversed his field and got blocks from Kramer on a long highlight-worthy run) to build the 21-7 lead that BD mentioned. It was a thrilling game to watch, but must have been exhausting physically and emotionally. I don't think they recovered from that one. After that first half against Atlanta, Ted Brown did nothing significant running or receiving for the rest of the year.
-- After the Atlanta game, they got off to a good start against Green Bay, but could not run the ball at all and Kramer threw 5 interceptions. The Bears loss was a bit of a fluke on the 72-yard TD pass from Avellini to Baschnagel, but again the Vikings could not run the ball at all and had 5 turnovers. I watched the Lions game (national TV on a Saturday) knowing there was no way they would win. They just didn't play well in the Silverdome back then, and at one point Grant even tried a surprise onsides kick which backfired. It was a mauling. The last game against KC was a ceremonial goodbye to the Met (I recently got the program from this one off ebay), which turned sad when the Vikes couldn't pull it out at the end.
-- In summary, the Vikings basically wound up about where they deserved ... 7-9. They weren't as bad as they looked in the first two games without Kramer, and they weren't as good as they looked in the five-game winning streak with him. If they had played 20 more games in addition to the 16 scheduled, they probably would have wound up about 18-18.
Some thoughts:
-- For years, the Vikings had drafted offensive linemen who were not physically overpowering and just did not develop into real hole-makers. When you saw them walk up the line of scrimmage, they looked small, slow, and kind of weak. Tim Irwin was the first guy they drafted in a long time with a real physical presence, and it took him a while to get his bearing in the league. So the running game was a constant weakness that they needed to cover up. Was it Bill Parcells or John Madden or some other coach who said "Come December, you need to be able to run the football." The Vikings had not been able to do this for years, and it was painfully apparent in 1981.
-- Combined with a below-average offensive line, the Vikings also couldn't find a speed back with breakaway presence. Any runs over 10 yards were very rare. Ted Brown, Rickey Young and others had their strengths as smart players with good hands to catch passes, and low fumble rates, but were not game-breakers. Jarvis Redwine gave me hope when they drafted him, but he did not develop.
-- Sammy White gave the team some "stretch the field" dimension, but this was a nickel and dime offense (West Coast offense per se) geared toward short passes to the RBs, and Rashad and Senser. I think that Terry LeCount actually scared some people as he had a knack for the big play, but he was dealing with substance abuse issues that likely affected his consistency (source: http://jacksonville.com/sports/college/ ... ack-school). So, back to the offense, all the emphasis on short passes sometimes meant balls were thrown into high-traffic areas, leading to tipped passes and spates of interceptions.
-- After Kramer came back from missing the first two games, the five-game winning streak was too much too soon for this team, in my opinion. Beating San Diego (incredible finish to that one) and absolutely throttling unbeaten Philadelphia I think got the Vikings way too full of themselves. Kramer was all over the media as this dashing "Two-Minute Tommy" persona (he made the cover of the Sporting News during that time, which was not as big as Sports Illustrated, but still a significant honor to be on the cover of a national sports weekly) who was saving the team from its 0-2 start, and he was a young guy with a glamour poster that was a hot seller in Minneapolis, and his interest in the night life has been well documented with repeated issues with alcohol.
-- Kramer also had a lot of bravado, with a sort of tic that he constantly pulled at his facemask when talking to the refs. It was kind of an odd motion, but made him look spirited and feisty. The problem with that is you when you do that and throw a pick, it looks like false machismo. He suffered 14 interceptions in the last five games, not all his fault, but the cumulative effect sent the team rolling downhill in my opinion as they gradually realized that beating SD and Philly did not mean that other teams would roll over for them.
-- Going into the Atlanta Monday Night game, they were 7-4 with a two-game lead in the NFC Central with five games to play. But losing to the Falcons really shook the team, I think. I remember watching that one on MNF, and the Vikings had some crazy long plays in the first half (one where Brown reversed his field and got blocks from Kramer on a long highlight-worthy run) to build the 21-7 lead that BD mentioned. It was a thrilling game to watch, but must have been exhausting physically and emotionally. I don't think they recovered from that one. After that first half against Atlanta, Ted Brown did nothing significant running or receiving for the rest of the year.
-- After the Atlanta game, they got off to a good start against Green Bay, but could not run the ball at all and Kramer threw 5 interceptions. The Bears loss was a bit of a fluke on the 72-yard TD pass from Avellini to Baschnagel, but again the Vikings could not run the ball at all and had 5 turnovers. I watched the Lions game (national TV on a Saturday) knowing there was no way they would win. They just didn't play well in the Silverdome back then, and at one point Grant even tried a surprise onsides kick which backfired. It was a mauling. The last game against KC was a ceremonial goodbye to the Met (I recently got the program from this one off ebay), which turned sad when the Vikes couldn't pull it out at the end.
-- In summary, the Vikings basically wound up about where they deserved ... 7-9. They weren't as bad as they looked in the first two games without Kramer, and they weren't as good as they looked in the five-game winning streak with him. If they had played 20 more games in addition to the 16 scheduled, they probably would have wound up about 18-18.
-
L.C. Greenwood
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 8:53 am
Re: ’81 Vikings - what happened?
[quote="Evan"]Yeah, I lived through this one as a 12-year-old Vikings fan back in 1981. I subscribed to Bob Lurtsema's Viking Report during that time, so I guess I had as much in-depth feedback as anyone.
Some thoughts:
-- For years, the Vikings had drafted offensive linemen who were not physically overpowering and just did not develop into real hole-makers. When you saw them walk up the line of scrimmage, they looked small, slow, and kind of weak. Tim Irwin was the first guy they drafted in a long time with a real physical presence, and it took him a while to get his bearing in the league. So the running game was a constant weakness that they needed to cover up. Was it Bill Parcells or John Madden or some other coach who said "Come December, you need to be able to run the football." The Vikings had not been able to do this for years, and it was painfully apparent in 1981.
-- Combined with a below-average offensive line, the Vikings also couldn't find a speed back with breakaway presence. Any runs over 10 yards were very rare. Ted Brown, Rickey Young and others had their strengths as smart players with good hands to catch passes, and low fumble rates, but were not game-breakers. Jarvis Redwine gave me hope when they drafted him, but he did not develop.
-- Sammy White gave the team some "stretch the field" dimension, but this was a nickel and dime offense (West Coast offense per se) geared toward short passes to the RBs, and Rashad and Senser. I think that Terry LeCount actually scared some people as he had a knack for the big play, but he was dealing with substance abuse issues that likely affected his consistency (source: http://jacksonville.com/sports/college/ ... ack-school). So, back to the offense, all the emphasis on short passes sometimes meant balls were thrown into high-traffic areas, leading to tipped passes and spates of interceptions.
A few years later, Buster Rhymes was another casualty of substance abuse problems in Minnesota. Like LeCount, Rhymes was a promising young player, but cocaine was everywhere in pro sports during the 1980s.
Some thoughts:
-- For years, the Vikings had drafted offensive linemen who were not physically overpowering and just did not develop into real hole-makers. When you saw them walk up the line of scrimmage, they looked small, slow, and kind of weak. Tim Irwin was the first guy they drafted in a long time with a real physical presence, and it took him a while to get his bearing in the league. So the running game was a constant weakness that they needed to cover up. Was it Bill Parcells or John Madden or some other coach who said "Come December, you need to be able to run the football." The Vikings had not been able to do this for years, and it was painfully apparent in 1981.
-- Combined with a below-average offensive line, the Vikings also couldn't find a speed back with breakaway presence. Any runs over 10 yards were very rare. Ted Brown, Rickey Young and others had their strengths as smart players with good hands to catch passes, and low fumble rates, but were not game-breakers. Jarvis Redwine gave me hope when they drafted him, but he did not develop.
-- Sammy White gave the team some "stretch the field" dimension, but this was a nickel and dime offense (West Coast offense per se) geared toward short passes to the RBs, and Rashad and Senser. I think that Terry LeCount actually scared some people as he had a knack for the big play, but he was dealing with substance abuse issues that likely affected his consistency (source: http://jacksonville.com/sports/college/ ... ack-school). So, back to the offense, all the emphasis on short passes sometimes meant balls were thrown into high-traffic areas, leading to tipped passes and spates of interceptions.
A few years later, Buster Rhymes was another casualty of substance abuse problems in Minnesota. Like LeCount, Rhymes was a promising young player, but cocaine was everywhere in pro sports during the 1980s.
Re: ’81 Vikings - what happened?
Good analysis by Evan. I remember reading a cover feature about Kramer in Inside Sports (Newsweek's short-lived stab at a sports periodical), and it was clear even then that he was burning the candle at both ends. Kramer shocked me when he had such a great season in 1986; I really thought all the partying had long since ruined him.
-
Todd Pence
- Posts: 755
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 9:07 am
Re: ’81 Vikings - what happened?
I remember what the old Cohen-Neft encyclopedia said about this squad: "They came apart like a cheap Coney Island shirt."