Page 2 of 5
Re: Vikings claim Ben Tate
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 5:40 pm
by PurpleKoolaid
Is he better at RB then Asiata? Or did they just pick him up for injuries? Hopefully he's good at screen passes, because if Norv doesn't have a lot of those in mind, I don't think he will be here long.
Re: Vikings claim Ben Tate
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 6:20 pm
by Noxage
Asiata is a replacement level back. Tate's probably a small upgrade and the cost is minimal. Thumbs up.
Re: Vikings claim Ben Tate
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 6:46 pm
by Orion
non news, nothing that will help or really hurt this team.
moving on...
Re: Vikings claim Ben Tate
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 6:52 pm
by Mothman
Cliff wrote:Funnily, Ben Tate just left a situation where he was frustrated with not getting enough touches in a 3-back rotation.
This should work out well for him then.
Re: Vikings claim Ben Tate
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 6:53 pm
by Purpnation
I actually recall watchin his draft story somewhere on NFLN, and he was pretty upset when the Vikes drafted Gerhart ahead of him.
Re: Vikings claim Ben Tate
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 7:02 pm
by Purple bruise
Re: Vikings claim Ben Tate
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 7:02 pm
by Demi
An upgrade over McKinnon and Asiata, not saying much. As long as he stays healthy.
Re: Vikings claim Ben Tate
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 7:09 pm
by 720pete
Great move IMO. This guy has a relatively small contract and if he sticks around we won't need to pick up a RB in the draft.
Re: Vikings claim Ben Tate
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 8:57 pm
by Laserman
Kinda with Demi on this one. If he is so good why did he get waived in the first place? Some of our Offensive lineman should be getting waived
Re: Vikings claim Ben Tate
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 9:04 pm
by PacificNorseWest
Laserman wrote:Kinda with Demi on this one. If he is so good why did he get waived in the first place? Some of our Offensive lineman should be getting waived
Cheaper and just as productive alternatives. He's a good back. Just injury prone. He won't be a workhorse back, I'd imagine. He will help keep McKinnon's rookie legs fresh. But again, he's a good back.
Re: Vikings claim Ben Tate
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 9:10 pm
by HardcoreVikesFan
I have always been a Ben Tate fan. I think this is an under-rated signing. I think Ben Tate has a chance to be a great player, if he can stay healthy.
Re: Vikings claim Ben Tate
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 9:12 pm
by Angels Wings
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
Yeah he's never had norv
Guess he looked at Norv and figured that he wouldn't be that good in bed
I'll let myself out...
Re: Vikings claim Ben Tate
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 9:27 pm
by Pondering Her Percy
Demi wrote:
An upgrade over McKinnon and Asiata, not saying much. As long as he stays healthy.
I wouldnt say he's an upgrade over McKinnon necessarily. McKinnon is good, I just don't think he's getting the touches he deserves
Re: Vikings claim Ben Tate
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 10:06 pm
by PurpleKoolaid
HardcoreVikesFan wrote:I have always been a Ben Tate fan. I think this is an under-rated signing. I think Ben Tate has a chance to be a great player, if he can stay healthy.
I was too, a couple years ago. Seems like someone who is about to bust loose for 1000 a year. But he is better then Asiata, not sure how good his blocking or receiving is. So yeah, bleh. Unless we need him. He can fill the spot nicely.
Re: Vikings claim Ben Tate
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 10:42 pm
by Demi
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
I wouldnt say he's an upgrade over McKinnon necessarily. McKinnon is good, I just don't think he's getting the touches he deserves
I like McKinnon. But he's more of a change of pace, third down, receiving, scat back type. Tate is an every down player. He can do it all. Just not great. Not the type of player I'm a fan of, but with what we have now I think overall he's an upgrade.