Zimmer, Vikings will remain patient with Patterson

[losperros]

Chip Scoggins has written a new article about Patterson:

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikin ... 06711.html
Someone here (I apologize for forgetting who) mentioned that Patterson was playing as if his injury is affecting him more than we've been told and it looks like that to me too. I'm just not seeing the same speed and explosive burst from him that I saw last year. Maybe he's healthy and its a matter of thinking too much and not playing at full speed but he looks "off" to me.

That said, I agree with saint33: give him the ball! What is there to lose?

I agree. What is there to lose? And perhaps CP's hip injury is worse than we're told. Then rest him and let him heal.

The one thing Scoggins somewhat misses, though he mentions it briefly, is that the entire Vikings offense is sucking right now. This isn't just about Patterson or Bridgewater or any one player. This is a team meltdown on offense, including the coaching that is paid to fix it.

[chicagopurple]

First thing i would do is eliminate all formations with tight ends or RB as an outlet reciever, and FORCE Teddy to have to work downfield. They have to get him out of this reflex of going to the safety valve....wins at this point arent the issue, its having our QB learn and grow for next yr.

[mansquatch]

The one thing Scoggins somewhat misses, though he mentions it briefly, is that the entire Vikings offense is sucking right now. This isn't just about Patterson or Bridgewater or any one player. This is a team meltdown on offense, including the coaching that is paid to fix it.

This is an excellent point.

[Mothman]

First thing i would do is eliminate all formations with tight ends or RB as an outlet reciever, and FORCE Teddy to have to work downfield. They have to get him out of this reflex of going to the safety valve....wins at this point arent the issue, its having our QB learn and grow for next yr.

I'm not sure that would help him learn or grow. It might just make him feel obligated to force the ball into coverage or end with him taking a beating from opposing defenses. The check downs are there for a reason and part of his development is learning when to take them. I don't think the solution is to take them away. I think they're better off to just keep coaching him. Help him work through the issues he's having.

[PacificNorseWest]

Before the season, he was a much better alternative to Percy. Now, he was a waste of a draft pick.

Doom or gloom.

Aaron Rodgers put it best: R-E-L-A-X. Relax.

[losperros]

This is an excellent point.

Thanks. But you and I might be the only ones that think this way.

[The Breeze]

Thanks. But you and I might be the only ones that think this way.

I definitely see it that way.

I don't know how big a difference Cassel would be at this point...but he seemed to click with Jennings who is hands down the best at running routes and getting open.

[Cliff]

Thanks. But you and I might be the only ones that think this way.

Of course the Vikings offense is awful, they've literally lost a player from every key phase of offense other than WR.

#1 QB (season), #1 RB (season), #1 TE (for a while, until last game where he wasn't a factor), and #1 RG (season). The only part of the offense that didn't lose a significant player (unless you count Simpson) was WR which is (before Kalil started playing horribly and Fusco went down) the weakest part of the offense.

Even if you count Cassel going down as a wash ... an offense built on the running game lost it's all-star RB, it's run-side guard, and the 'safety valve' TE.

Call it a 'melt down' if you want, but I can't see most teams having a good offense in that situation. It's just not realistic to have very high expectations for that bunch.

In the NFL you need talent and good coaching to win ... but you also need a bit of luck (normally in the form of most of the team staying healthy or a backup stepping in and performing well for an injured player). We can argue whether or not the 2014 Vikings had/have enough talent and good coaching ... but one thing we *know* is they have had horrible luck.

[PacificNorseWest]

Well put.

[losperros]

Even if you count Cassel going down as a wash ... an offense built on the running game lost it's all-star RB, it's run-side guard, and the 'safety valve' TE.

Call it a 'melt down' if you want, but I can't see most teams having a good offense in that situation. It's just not realistic to have very high expectations for that bunch.

It's still a team meltdown on offense, regardless what happened. The point is it's not one individual player throwing pipe wrench into the works.

The offense is a dysfunctional unit for a number of reasons, including the coordinating.

Regarding building an offense on the running game, I mentioned that before and someone (cough*Moth*cough) didn't agree.

Well, I still believe that's part of the problem. There has been too much emphasis put on the Vikings being a running team, due to AD's greatness. But as we learned briefly in 2009, a strong passing game is not a luxury but a need for any team that wants to win.

[Mothman]

Regarding building an offense on the running game, I mentioned that before and someone (cough*Moth*cough) didn't agree.

You should see a doctor about that cough, Craig.

Just to clarify, I was disagreeing from an intent/personnel standpoint, not from a play calling standpoint. The offense has clearly been relied on a solid foundation of running the football for years. However, I think that was as much a result of botched attempts to build a quality passing game as on personnel choices designed to enhance the running game at the possible expense of the passing game. Do you know what I mean? Put simply, I think they've been trying and, for the most part, failing to build a strong passing game since 2005 and have repeatedly had to fall back on the run as their "bread and butter" because it's been their best option.

Well, I still believe that's part of the problem. There has been too much emphasis put on the Vikings being a running team, due to AD's greatness. But as we learned briefly in 2009, a strong passing game is not a luxury but a need for any team that wants to win.

It is but is that a question of emphasis by design or emphasis by necessity? What have the expensive free agent signings of players like Jennings, Berrian (and Favre for that matter) and the drafting of Rice, Harvin, Rudolph, Patterson, Ponder, Bridgewater, Wright, Childs and others been if not efforts to build a better passing game? I think the emphasis on the run has been an emphasis of necessity because they've simply failed in their to build a better passing game that they could sustain. It worked briefly with Favre but that wasn't sustainable because of his age (among other reasons).

[losperros]

You should see a doctor about that cough, Craig.

It is but is that a question of emphasis by design or emphasis by necessity? What have the expensive free agent signings of players like Jennings, Berrian (and Favre for that matter) and the drafting of Rice, Harvin, Rudolph, Patterson, Ponder, Bridgewater, Wright, Childs and others been if not efforts to build a better passing game? I think the emphasis on the run has been an emphasis of necessity because they've simply failed in their to build a better passing game that they could sustain. It worked briefly with Favre but that wasn't sustainable because of his age (among other reasons).

I understand the necessity/design parts and I'm not disagreeing with that. However, aside from 2009, I think Chili put too much emphasis on running the ball and not rebuilding the passing game once Culpepper was out of the game. As for Favre, the Vikings were lucky he was available for the year. No way that was part of Chili's infamous 5-year plan.

I'm not trying to dump on Childress but that gives some perspective about the how long the Vikings have had an anemic passing game. Meanwhile, AD was carrying the offense on his back and the OL has usually been comprised of huge guys that aren't always the best athletes. Admittedly, I thought Kalil was a step in the right direction and now he's having issues. Can't win for losing, I guess.

Despite all the FA signings and draft picks (which I think were pretty darn good), the Vikings again have a dysfunctional offense and the passing game simply doesn't work. There is something wrong. Seems to me that once Adrian Peterson is removed from the equation, the Vikings offense becomes a rudderless boat. It has no signature, no real identity, and it has too much talent at the skill positions to be that way. The team was dependent on AD making super-human plays and despite what talent was/is available, something remains wrong.

Since I'm not in on the team meetings, I can't say this for certain but from what I've seen this year I would say that some philosophical changes need to be made with the team, including a little less "power running" mantra now that AD is gone. I'm not saying this team is the Broncos or Pats, but there is some talent there at the skill positions and, as I've said before, there are coaches that are paid to fix problems. And even you agreed that a guy like Patterson simply isn't being used for his strengths.

Something is wrong and perhaps some thinking needs to change in the Vikings brain trust. As a fan, it frustrates me to see another year with a crippled passing game.

[PurpleKoolaid]

I don't think its really fair to say 'so and so was injured, he must still be injured, therefor his game will suffer'. Its kind of like the excuses people were making for Twill when he was dropping balls. Every single team in the NFL has injuries from day 1. The good teams still find ways to win games. The bad ones sit around and talk about how cursed they are with all the injuries. That's where having good backups come into play. For us, we don't even have good starters in key positions. Saying CP is injured is a cop out. Norv would know if he's too injured to play. If he is hurt, sit him down till he isn't. Same with Kalil, if its in his head, take him out of the game. The good teams, the ones that are good EVERY year it seems, have injuries too.

We took a huge risk with CP not knowing the WR position, and I believe now, we are paying for it. Same with McKinnon. We are really going to see how using a 3rd rd pick on him will hurt, now that we are going to need a solid RB (meaning one who has played the position for 3-4 years in college). I think it was a bad pick, and the excuse was Norv wanted his new version of Sporels. I think a RB and WR will be the main concerns for next year. I hope our scouts are up for the task. I cant imagine trying to replace the best RB of our time (well one of the best). Now we need to try and find a Murray type of back that can do everything. There is nothing wrong in using the running game to open up the passing game. And for the love of all that's holy, find a starting guard to replace Johnson!

[J. Kapp 11]

I don't think its really fair to say 'so and so was injured, he must still be injured, therefor his game will suffer'. Its kind of like the excuses people were making for Twill when he was dropping balls. Every single team in the NFL has injuries from day 1. The good teams still find ways to win games. The bad ones sit around and talk about how cursed they are with all the injuries. That's where having good backups come into play. For us, we don't even have good starters in key positions. Saying CP is injured is a cop out. Norv would know if he's too injured to play. If he is hurt, sit him down till he isn't. Same with Kalil, if its in his head, take him out of the game. The good teams, the ones that are good EVERY year it seems, have injuries too.

We took a huge risk with CP not knowing the WR position, and I believe now, we are paying for it. Same with McKinnon. We are really going to see how using a 3rd rd pick on him will hurt, now that we are going to need a solid RB (meaning one who has played the position for 3-4 years in college). I think it was a bad pick, and the excuse was Norv wanted his new version of Sporels. I think a RB and WR will be the main concerns for next year. I hope our scouts are up for the task. I cant imagine trying to replace the best RB of our time (well one of the best). Now we need to try and find a Murray type of back that can do everything. There is nothing wrong in using the running game to open up the passing game. And for the love of all that's holy, find a starting guard to replace Johnson!

If either or both of these players pan out, are you going to recant and say you were wrong?

I mean, for crying out loud ... Jerick McKinnon has played all of 10 games. Neither he nor anyone else thought he'd get more than 50 carries playing behind AP, yet he leads all rookies in rushing yards -- and you're already calling him a bust.

Patterson has been disappointing, but that doesn't mean he'll stay that way. Reports I read point to his lack of maturity more than his ability. Immature people tend to mature at some point. Not saying he'll ever live up to the hype, but it seems pretty dismissive to apply the bust label to a player of Patterson's talent 2/3 of the way through his second season.

[PacificNorseWest]

Same with McKinnon. We are really going to see how using a 3rd rd pick on him will hurt, now that we are going to need a solid RB (meaning one who has played the position for 3-4 years in college). I think it was a bad pick, and the excuse was Norv wanted his new version of Sporels.

My man...you do realize that the value of the NFL RB has drastically changed in the last 5 years right? RB's don't have much 1st round value these days because of their bust potential and because of their quick wear and tear. Even more so when you're talking about a running back who has 3-4 years of a pounding already in college. It diminishes their value considerably. These type of dudes only produce for a season or two, if that, in the NFL because they were workhorses in college.

You can think that McKinnon was a bad pick all you want, but it's not because he was taken in the 3rd round. In fact, given where the team is as a whole, I thought it was a viable pick given that they were drafting for future need and developmental purposes. Besides, he hasn't even played that poorly. I would actually argue he's played pretty well given the circumstances.