IrishViking wrote:
Lazy, bad, unluckily, unskilled, whatever. Bottom line is there is no reason to but him on the field beyond throwing spaghetti at the wall out of frustration
Based on zimmer's quotes today, I'm not sure lazy is correct. Maybe just he's just not good enough as a receiver in Norv's opinion? It does seem like Norv completely changed his opinion on Charles Johnson this year based on previous comments about him being the best WR on the team.
@mattvensel Mike Zimmer said it's on Cordarrelle Patterson to become a real WR. "If he doesn't do it, then that's what he's going to be, a returner."
Hester was more or less just a returner/special play guy for part of the time in Chicago and Atlanta. Maybe that's all Patterson really is, but I do believe the Offensive gameplan could put some special plays in. The speed/elusiveness is there even if the route running/blocking aren't. Use what you have.
Crax wrote:
Based on zimmer's quotes today, I'm not sure lazy is correct. Maybe just he's just not good enough as a receiver in Norv's opinion? It does seem like Norv completely changed his opinion on Charles Johnson this year based on previous comments about him being the best WR on the team.
Hester was more or less just a returner/special play guy for part of the time in Chicago and Atlanta. Maybe that's all Patterson really is, but I do believe the Offensive gameplan could put some special plays in. The speed/elusiveness is there even if the route running/blocking aren't. Use what you have.
I am in no way opposed to that at all. He does have speed and elusiveness. Stick him in every once in a while for sweeps or what not, I just get frustrated by, it seems like every month, the unwarranted anger of Zimmer and Norv "wasting" his skills that he has never shown to possess.
IrishViking wrote:
Hey now, Argue the semantics all you want but the burden of proof is on the people who think they know Patterson talent level better than the coaches. You cant skip the burden of proof for that side and go right to me needed to prove my point based on language choice
Its not a question of semantics. As I said, the burden of proof is on the accuser. That's true if someone accuses the coaches of being petty and it;s equally true if you're going to accuse him of being lazy and having a poor work ethic.
Lazy, bad, unluckily, unskilled, whatever. Bottom line is there is no reason to but him on the field beyond throwing spaghetti at the wall out of frustration
Your reasoning seems circular: there's no reason to put him on the field because the coaches chose not to put him on the field. Does every coach make the right choice about how to use their personnel in every instance?
Mothman wrote:
Its not a question of semantics. As I said, the burden of proof is on the accuser. That's true if someone accuses the coaches of being petty and it;s equally true if you're going to accuse him of being lazy and having a poor work ethic.
Your reasoning is circular, you're assuming : there's no reason to put him on the field because the coaches chose not to put him on the field. Does every coach make the right choice about how to use their personnel in every instance?
I'll clarify, my logic is that he was HIGHLY ineffective when he was given chances as a WR. I never challenge his ability, its his skill. So he wasn't good enough and didn't do what he needed to do to stay on the field. He is still not on the field, therefore he is still not doing what he needs to do to get on the field.
The main thing I wonder with Norv though is if he is so stuck into a certain philosophies that he becomes inflexible. What happened to Charles Johnson this year? Once we started going Wallace/Diggs, he disappeared. I guess he had an injury or something here along the way, but not the whole time. It seems like the WR off the bench is Wright and Theilen. They couldn't ever shift guys around and do johnson and or patterson instead? We threw a nice quick slant to wright in a game this year where he got the first but was immediately tackled. Patterson can run a plain slant. He would have had a far higher chance to break a tackle from a corner IMO than wright. Get that mismatch in the lineup and make a corner have to tackle Patterson on a quick slant. The field was wide open too if the corner didn't get wright down.
I'm not saying he should be starting but Norv seems to have very specific 3/4 wr sets. Put Patterson in the slot and make some small corner have to fight with him.
IrishViking wrote:I'll clarify, my logic is that he was HIGHLY ineffective when he was given chances as a WR. I never challenge his ability, its his skill. So he wasn't good enough and didn't do what he needed to do to stay on the field. He is still not on the field, therefore he is still not doing what he needs to do to get on the field.
Thanks. Your last statement is self-evident but since we don't really know what he'd have to do to get on the field at this point, or why the coaches won't put him there, it seems unfair to assume a lack of effort. He might be busting his rear end to get on the field more as a receiver. It's just not happening.
Mothman wrote:
Thanks. Your last statement is self-evident but since we don't really know what he'd have to do to get on the field at this point, or why the coaches won't put him there, it seems unfair to assume a lack of effort. He might be busting his rear end to get on the field more as a receiver. It's just not happening.
Agreed, the lazy part was a low blow and I apologize to Patterson if he is reading.
Mothman wrote:
Thanks. Your last statement is self-evident but since we don't really know what he'd have to do to get on the field at this point, or why the coaches won't put him there, it seems unfair to assume a lack of effort. He might be busting his rear end to get on the field more as a receiver. It's just not happening.
As a 1st round pick with as much athletic talent as he has I'm sure the coaches are giving him the opportunity to prove himself. To me it seems obvious that Patterson just isn't beating out his competition. The only other options are they the coaches don't "like" him (or aren't 'smart' enough to get him in the game) or he's not "trying". Both of those seems unlikely to me.
I personally just think Zimmer is an "earn it" coach. If the other WRs are doing their job better in practice they're going to be the ones playing. That's really his team philosophy it seems. You're not going to get placed into a starting position based on raw ability or where you were drafted. Be at the right place at the right time and understand your role. Earn your spot or ride the bench until you do. Patterson is the best returner, so he's starting there. If he can beat out other WR's he'll start there.
I can't speculate on what he needs to do in order to earn that spot. If I was a betting man though, I'd bet that the coaching staff has filled him in on that and he hasn't been able to.
Cliff wrote:As a 1st round pick with as much athletic talent as he has I'm sure the coaches are giving him the opportunity to prove himself. To me it seems obvious that Patterson just isn't beating out his competition. The only other options are they the coaches don't "like" him (or aren't 'smart' enough to get him in the game) or he's not "trying". Both of those seems unlikely to me.
I personally just think Zimmer is an "earn it" coach. If the other WRs are doing their job better in practice they're going to be the ones playing. That's really his team philosophy it seems. You're not going to get placed into a starting position based on raw ability or where you were drafted. Be at the right place at the right time and understand your role. Earn your spot or ride the bench until you do. Patterson is the best returner, so he's starting there. If he can beat out other WR's he'll start there.
I can't speculate on what he needs to do in order to earn that spot. If I was a betting man though, I'd bet that the coaching staff has filled him in on that and he hasn't been able to.
My honest guess is that he likes the kickoffs and he like gimmick plays. He enjoys contributing and being a teammate but he has no desire to be a WR in the league, I think if we didn't have Sherel's he would probably want to be our sole return man and make that his game.
He strikes me as a nice, happy-go-lucky guy and a good teammate. But that doesn't mean he has the fire in his belly they same way Sherman does
IrishViking wrote:My honest guess is that he likes the kickoffs and he like gimmick plays. He enjoys contributing and being a teammate but he has no desire to be a WR in the league, I think if we didn't have Sherel's he would probably want to be our sole return man and make that his game.
He strikes me as a nice, happy-go-lucky guy and a good teammate. But that doesn't mean he has the fire in his belly they same way Sherman does
You might be right. I'm not trying to argue with you.
My biggest gripe about Patterson and Johnson sitting on the bench is that I think they could have contributed to a passing game that wasn't all that great. Seems as if Patterson in particular could have helped them finish some drives with TDs. I also don't understand why Frazier/Musgrave could get such big plays out of CP during his rookie season but Zimmer/Turner can't and/or won't now. I guess I'm just not seeing how it would have hurt to utilize his skills last season beyond returning kicks.
losperros wrote:
You might be right. I'm not trying to argue with you.
My biggest gripe about Patterson and Johnson sitting on the bench is that I think they could have contributed to a passing game that wasn't all that great. Seems as if Patterson in particular could have helped them finish some drives with TDs. I also don't understand why Frazier/Musgrave could get such big plays out of CP during his rookie season but Zimmer/Turner can't and/or won't now. I guess I'm just not seeing how it would have hurt to utilize his skills last season beyond returning kicks.
Actually, Zimmer and Turner DID get at least one big play out of Patterson ... see the season opener in 2014 against the Rams.
He was a starter then, and he made one of the Vikings' most dynamic plays of 2014 in that game. So obviously SOMETHING happened to land him on the bench. That's the part none of us know, and probably won't know until after he's not a Viking anymore.
I'd like to point out ... while it's definitely wrong to assume that Patterson is lazy, or to assume any reason based on the man himself, it's just as wrong to assume Turner and/or Zimmer simply don't like him, or have a bone to pick with him, or any other such reason. We don't know why he doesn't play, making any reason we give pure speculation not founded in ... anything. I understand being frustrated with an ineffective passing game when you have athletes like Patterson and Johnson on the bench. But it still doesn't explain why they aren't playing, so it's wrong to blame either party. It sucks, given the hope we had for both these guys, but it's something we all have to live with.
J. Kapp 11 wrote:
Actually, Zimmer and Turner DID get at least one big play out of Patterson ... see the season opener in 2014 against the Rams.
He was a starter then, and he made one of the Vikings' most dynamic plays of 2014 in that game. So obviously SOMETHING happened to land him on the bench. That's the part none of us know, and probably won't know until after he's not a Viking anymore.
I'd like to point out ... while it's definitely wrong to assume that Patterson is lazy, or to assume any reason based on the man himself, it's just as wrong to assume Turner and/or Zimmer simply don't like him, or have a bone to pick with him, or any other such reason. We don't know why he doesn't play, making any reason we give pure speculation not founded in ... anything. I understand being frustrated with an ineffective passing game when you have athletes like Patterson and Johnson on the bench. But it still doesn't explain why they aren't playing, so it's wrong to blame either party. It sucks, given the hope we had for both these guys, but it's something we all have to live with.
You're right. None of know the real story here. And you're right about me being frustrated. It just seems like a waste of talent.
BTW, someone told me they think that Zimmer and Turner had Patterson sit this year and watch, not unlike developing QBs sometimes have to do. So there's yet another theory to add to the list. Who knows? Maybe it's working.
I hope things change next year and both Patterson and Johnson get more touches. I'll feel a lot better.
losperros wrote:
You're right. None of know the real story here. And you're right about me being frustrated. It just seems like a waste of talent.
BTW, someone told me they think that Zimmer and Turner had Patterson sit this year and watch, not unlike developing QBs sometimes have to do. So there's yet another theory to add to the list. Who knows? Maybe it's working.
I hope things change next year and both Patterson and Johnson get more touches. I'll feel a lot better.
But then diggs, Wright, and Thielen will be on the bench...
