Vikings Message Board.Com

Mothman wrote:As I believe I've said before, I'm not really interested in assigning fault when it comes to this subject. My interest is in seeing an obviously talented player's ability actually used for the benefit of the team, in seeing an expensive asset (in terms of draft resources) used for more than kickoff returns and in getting a better understanding of what, specifically, has been going on behind the scenes. I realize the latter is probably never going to happen. As for the former, I think the solution depends on the exact nature of the problem but if they don't want to start him, one potential approach would be to design a limited set of plays for him that make good use of his skills and abilities. Coaches have been doing that with players for decades so it's not exactly an unusual idea.

The Breeze wrote:@Mondry
I don't see this as a Zimmer issue at all.
I expect Zimmer to tell Norv, 'Score some points, get this offense rolling, that is your job after all'.
It's on Norv to do that. The suggestion of using CP in an ambiguous way is merely an idea that could help Norv out in that department.
Ultimately the overall success or lack thereof on offense will force Zimer's hand. I think it would be poor form to try and micro manage individual player scenarios from an absolute stand point.
-
IMO,CP doesn't represent the shortcomings of this offense, he is part of a possible solution.
It's on Norv. Some of us believe that in time with a better line and QB play he'll win out. Others believe he is a dead man walking. And everything in between. It's a compelling situation because of how much potential this team is displaying.
My feel is that the longer it takes for this issue to resolve, one way or the other, the less chance they will have of meeting that potential. I literally think this offense has to take huge strides next season for Norv to keep his job.
I don't even care if CP has a significant role or not as long as it gets better.

losperros wrote: I agree wholeheartedly. As I've said before, I like Zimmer a lot but that doesn't mean I won't question what's going on with the team. Why not? Admittedly, I'm not crazy about Norv but Zimmer has final say. Anyway, Zimmer said he hasn't given up on Patterson and I take him at his word, so I'm hoping he will utilize CP more often next season.

Whatever the case, I believe Patterson can catch passes (because he has) and can be used in other ways to help the offense score points. In my view, the offense needs help in that category. They needed it last season and I found it puzzling that they kept both Patterson and Johnson on the bench.

Mothman wrote: The "lines of coke" stuff is a bit much.

In 2014, Patterson was thrust into a new role (split end) in a new offense and used unimaginatively. He played through a hip injury and with Peterson out, he was typically the biggest threat to make a big play on the field, which made plays that utilized deception to get him in space with the football more difficult to pull off (it's probably not a coincidence that his biggest game of 2014 was also the only game in which Peterson played). They ran him on a lot of deep routes and seam routes, most of which didn't yield much. Those weren't his best routes and several times, when he did get open down the field, everybody's favorite QB missed him. he seemed to struggle to fully grasp his role in the offense and that's obviously one of the reasons he lost it.

This debate has basically been a "faith in Zimmer" discussion for months now, which is why it never goes anywhere. Fans who "believe" in Zimmer seem to have the utmost confidence in his judgment when it comes to personnel. Those of us who don't share that level of confidence in his judgment question why a player with obvious playmaking ability (yes, there IS evidence that Patterson is being wasted) didn't get more than a few touches on offense all year when that offense obviously struggled to make big plays and score points. There's no way to know who is ultimately right and assumptions abound about what's going on behind the scenes because we have very little concrete information.

The actual "end of story" moment probably won't arrive until Patterson's contract is up.

slapnut19 wrote:sorry, but that's a lot of excuses about his 2014 season.

he got touches as a wr and a rb and basically had one play on opening day and showed very little of the playmaking ability everyone keeps chriping about. he isn't being wasted. he had a good rookie year and followed it up with a flop, and hasn't done enough to get more plays during games since. why is it so hard to believe that he is the problem?

Mothman wrote: I'm not making excuses. that's what i saw happen. maybe you had a different take but I saw the unimaginative playcalling, saw the overthrown passes and the hip injury is a matter of record (seems like an injury that might effect a player who has to run on every down, not to mention plant and cut).
Because this year, without an injury, he's looked as explosive as ever on kickoffs. Because I saw him easily blow past a defender and get a wide open for a 20+ yard TD in the preseason.

Why is it so hard to believe he could still contribute explosive plays on offense?

The answer seems to be faith in a coaching staff that hasn't earned it yet when it comes to offense.

The Breeze wrote:CP caught 33 for 384 and 1td in 2014
-
Jarius Wright caught 34 for 442 and 0 td this season
_
Wright has more experience and is not nearly as cerebrally challenged as CP...or so I'm led to believe...yet he was just as teribble in the 'Norvous System' as CP.
Mike Wallace has had the worst season of his prolific career as the main man in the 'Norvous System'
-
The big knock on Zimmer proffered as a reason for him being passed over repeatedly for HC positions was that there was concern that he was not a sound offensive mind. It seemed the hiring of Turner was a shrewd move to mitigate that prospect.
Lo and behold, the offense is a bottom feeder, wideouts having career worst seasons. TB has regressed more thn progressed. AD wins the rushing title while complaining every 3rd week that he's not getting enough carries...despite him getting 80% of 1st down plays for less than 3ypc. In the final game 20% of his carries go for negative or no yds.
Sure it could all be a matter of the line being bunk.....but I think it's the philosophy in general.
Spielman and Sparano have a ot of work to do I guess.

The Breeze wrote:@Mondry
I think Musgrave did some cool stuff...he displayed some week to week innovation, which is something I like. An offense that doesn't pretend to have it all figured out but is continually evolving.
I think he had to deal with similar line issues with a QB who exhibited far less poise under pressure.
He seems a good fit in Oakland.

I think it's going to be difficult for any OC here as long as AD is the dominant personality and focus on offense.
I'm actually waiting for the time when McKinnon is more of the focus in the run game....I think he is really good. And the QB (hopefully TB) is the dominant personality.

The Breeze wrote:@Mondry
I didn't mean to go off on a tangent and/or imply that the offenses problems are AD's fault. He is what he is and coaches do what they do. That's played out how it has.
I know my opinion will be mostly unappreciated...but I'll just be glad when the AD era is over, for several reasons.
-
One thought on McKinnon: I'm not convinced that play action would be significantly less successful with him. He showed in the Giant game that he can be a homerun threat and that his ypc, last season as the starter, was near the top of the league. Again I'm not advocating for a change at RB.... They're going into the new stadium, AD has a deep emotional connection with most Viking fans.....I'm just one of those who will not be sad to see him hang it up or move on. I think the running game can be just as effective with McKinnon, even if they don't lead the league in yardage.
-
Interestingly enough, I find CP and AD more similar than not in skill. They are very dissimilar in mental makeup though and I guess a big part of the debate here is whether or not that makes either of them more or less effective with the ball in their hands. I think, regardless of their mental appitude and/or demeanor, that each of them is much more capable with the ball in their hands than Norv is with the playcard in his.

mondry wrote: It's funny, many may not agree but I think we'd be better off with a Musgrave offense paired with a Zimmer defense. Of course it'll never happen but I do feel bad for talking so poorly of Musgrave all that time when he was putting up more PPG (with Ponder) than Norv does lol. At the very least, you know he'd get Patterson involved.