What are your expectations for Teddy this season?

[Jordysghost]

Saying Diggs has Rookie of the Year potential, is a little bit of an overstatement.

[Mothman]

Saying Diggs has Rookie of the Year potential, is a little bit of an overstatement.

I don't think so. After all, saying he has that potential isn't the same as saying he's likely to be the ROY. Diggs has 13 catches for 216 yards after his first two NFL appearances. If (and it's a big "if") he were to maintain that kind of production the rest of the year and start getting into the endzone as well, he could very well end up in the ROY conversation.

[PurpleMustReign]

I don't think so. After all, saying he has that potential isn't the same as saying he's likely to be the ROY. Diggs has 13 catches for 216 yards after his first two NFL appearances. If (and it's a big "if") he were to maintain that kind of production the rest of the year and start getting into the endzone as well, he could very well end up in the ROY conversation.

Plus ODB didn't play all games last year either.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[HardcoreVikesFan]

I've soured on norv a lot, (I don't want to get to into it cause I could spend an hour on this post (and probably will anyway!)) but basically I just thought we had zero killer instinct from a play calling perspective versus an extremely vulnerable to the pass chiefs defense. If that's all the creativity he has and that's all we can muster against them then I'm feeling very bleh about our future on offense.

If you look at the stats Teddy went 17-31 for 249 1 TD and 2 INT's while we handed off 32 times, it's one thing to play conservative in order to protect the football but it didn't even really do that forcing Teddy into some tough situations. I get that you have to feed Peterson and he can break one at any time but I think the overall problem I had with the game flow was that running so much on 1st and 2nd down didn't give us easy 3rd downs. They were prepared to stop the run and it's one of the Chiefs strengths anyway and what seemed to happen was that we would be in predictable 3rd and 8+ situations which imo negates the whole "we have peterson, should be able to pass easy" "advantage" that having a back like him gives you.

Some of the route designs and what not are really confusing as well, if you go on nfl.com and look at the "highlight" for that first interception you see wright and diggs basically run together down the left side line while wallace cuts across the field to the right side while we also have a TE over there. The result is that we have 2 WR's end up in almost the exact same place way down the left side of the field and a WR and a TE that end up in almost the same place on the other side of the field with no one in the middle. Teddy ultimately gets pressured and throws to the TE but it sails a bit and the guys covering wallace come up with the interception. I don't have the coaches film this year so I don't know how common stuff like this is but that one left me scratching my head.

Wright had a catch for 52 and diggs had one for 31 so to me it just seemed like plays were there to be made but I can't really put my figure on why it didn't happen more. I don't feel like the players underformed, Diggs looked great and Wright got open, to me it feels like either a play calling thing or just the routes and play design are lacking.

I know Jim was way ahead of the curve on this one but now it seems more like he simply isn't open minded / creative enough to get a guy like Patterson involved, I supported the idea of keeping Patterson off the field if he couldn't execute his duty's as a WR at a high rate but now I'm thinking it's more that Norv simply is failing to give or create him a role. It also confuses me how Stefan Diggs didn't see the field at all until an injury forced him into playing time and now he looks like he has ROY potential.

He was suppose to make Peterson a pass catching beast and TE's always go bonkers in his system and yet Rudolph despite the TD was nearly invisible and none of our backs are catching the ball. Seems like what was good about Norv's offense isn't there anymore and I'm not seeing anything new worth getting excited about. At least Musgrave was creative enough to get Harvin and Patterson involved and despite my feelings toward the condensed power running formations they did spring Peterson for his best year ever running the ball. I just don't see what the advantage of Norv's offense is, what stands out?

What confused me the most was the second to last series the offense had the ball (the last series was the kneel down offense). Why is Norv calling a fly route to Wallace in that situation on third down? Also, another thing that has been bugging me is the question as to whether or not Teddy has audible power? I am not so sure he does. I cannot see how Teddy would himself go along with that third down play call otherwise.

[PurpleMustReign]

What confused me the most was the second to last series the offense had the ball (the last series was the kneel down offense). Why is Norv calling a fly route to Wallace in that situation on third down? Also, another thing that has been bugging me is the question as to whether or not Teddy has audible power? I am not so sure he does. I cannot see how Teddy would himself go along with that third down play call otherwise.

He did last year, i am not sure about this year. I am really disappointed with the offense thus far.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[DK Sweets]

What confused me the most was the second to last series the offense had the ball (the last series was the kneel down offense). Why is Norv calling a fly route to Wallace in that situation on third down? Also, another thing that has been bugging me is the question as to whether or not Teddy has audible power? I am not so sure he does. I cannot see how Teddy would himself go along with that third down play call otherwise.

I have no issue with the play call. If he hits Wallace for a TD we're applauding the attitude to stomp out the opposition and both Teddy and Wallace suddenly go from underachievers to the reason we win the game.

I get that every play call is open to questioning, but in my opinion we've been complaining so much about how conservative some play calls are that it seem unfair to then complain about an aggressive one. Why not just keep it simple and say "I'm frustrated with the execution"?

[Pondering Her Percy]

I have no issue with the play call. If he hits Wallace for a TD we're applauding the attitude to stomp out the opposition and both Teddy and Wallace suddenly go from underachievers to the reason we win the game.

I get that every play call is open to questioning, but in my opinion we've been complaining so much about how conservative some play calls are that it seem unfair to then complain about an aggressive one. Why not just keep it simple and say "I'm frustrated with the execution"?

Agreed once again. Teddy isn't executing. Does the o-line help? No but Phillip Rivers finds ways to play well with a very bad offensive line. He needs to starting making better decisions. Period

[PurpleMustReign]

Agreed once again. Teddy isn't executing. Does the o-line help? No but Phillip Rivers finds ways to play well with a very bad offensive line. He needs to starting making better decisions. Period

Agreed.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[Cliff]

Teddy is making young guy mistakes but he's a smart guy, I expect decision making to get better (not that it's terrible now compared to some other rookies we've seen).

Re: Turner. My biggest problem with Turner is that he seems unable or unwilling to modify his "system" to account for the weak offensive line. More plays that develop more quickly would allow the team to use Patterson more too. Allow him to use his natural skillset more instead of keeping a weapon like him off the field because of his route running. Maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part.

[losperros]

I know Jim was way ahead of the curve on this one but now it seems more like he simply isn't open minded / creative enough to get a guy like Patterson involved, I supported the idea of keeping Patterson off the field if he couldn't execute his duty's as a WR at a high rate but now I'm thinking it's more that Norv simply is failing to give or create him a role.

You're not the only one asking questions about that. Read the following...

http://www.startribune.com/is-it-time-t ... 334230711/

This Vikings offense needs to score more points. If there is a way to do it, then Turner should make it happen.

[Mothman]

You're not the only one asking questions about that. Read the following...

http://www.startribune.com/is-it-time-t ... 334230711/

This Vikings offense needs to score more points. If there is a way to do it, then Turner should make it happen.

Thanks for the link, Craig. To answer a few of Michael rand's questions:

Is it time for the Vikings’ offensive regime to stop trying to make Cordarrelle Patterson a complete receiver and go back to the previous regime’s strategy of just getting him the ball in creative ways to let him try to make magic?

Yes, it's way past time.

But the larger question still holds: Is this a team that could use someone with game-breaking skills with the ball in his hands on 5-7 plays a game? Not 5-7 snaps per game. But getting the actual ball 5-7 times per game in non-return situations?

Yes. That's Rand's answer too:

I think the answer might be yes. That doesn’t even mean you have to stop working on making him a complete receiver in case the light bulb flickers. And again: Zimmer and Turner are clearly more patient than I am. They might have every reason to not play Patterson because of what they see in practice. My longest look at Patterson came in 2013, when he had nine touchdowns even though defenses knew what was coming in a lot of cases. Since then, he’s scored twice.

The gap between the ideal return on investment and the likely return on investment with Patterson is significant. But that doesn’t mean he has no value at all.

Bingo!

[mondry]

Yeah, I supported the idea of using Johnson, Wallace, and Wright as much as possible for a long time with the pretense that they would be much more productive WR's than Patterson. However, they haven't been nearly as successful as they probably should be so now it just doesn't make much sense to use them over Patterson, even in a gimmicky role because Patterson's physical talent / ability should be able to muster like 4 manufactured touches for 60 yards with some upside home run ability.

Put another way, if Charles Johnson is gonna have 3 catches for 36 yards I'd rather Patterson be on the field. Especially since Stefan Diggs has come in and out performed the whole lot of them. They aren't getting it done so at this point Patterson deserves some playing time.

[Funkytown]

Agreed.

He sure does. But Rivers? Yeah, Rivers is like 4th all-time in consecutive starts by a QB in NFL history. I'd hope he would be able to play well a bit more consistently with a struggling offensive line. Give Bridgewater a little more time before you make that kind of comparison.

[mondry]

He sure does. But Rivers? Yeah, Rivers is like 4th all-time in consecutive starts by a QB in NFL history. I'd hope he would be able to play well a bit more consistently with a struggling offensive line. Give Bridgewater a little more time before you make that kind of comparison.

LOL yeah, the dudes in like his 14th season with Antonio Gates and Keenan Allen on his hot routes. Not quite sure we're talking apples to apples here!

[Pondering Her Percy]

He sure does. But Rivers? Yeah, Rivers is like 4th all-time in consecutive starts by a QB in NFL history. I'd hope he would be able to play well a bit more consistently with a struggling offensive line. Give Bridgewater a little more time before you make that kind of comparison.

I understand what you're saying but guys on here are acting like it's impossible to play well behind a bad offensive line. The thing is, rivers is playing exceptionally well. Teddy is playing below average. Big difference there. I would be happy if teddy was playing average to slightly above average but right now he's not and I'm not going to sit here and put all the blame on the offensive line