NFL.com: Vikings season preview: Teddy Bridgewater or bust

[Mothman]

My concern is I think he is rapidly approaching the status of being a "Tell" about the only think you can be sure of this year with Patterson on the field is that he ISN'T going to run any sort of route.

... and that's on Turner, not Patterson.

[IrishViking]

... and that's on Turner, not Patterson.

I can't honestly grasp how its on Turner if Patterson cant play Wide Receiver... We have a Future Hall of Famer at RB and a Wideout who has shown his ability to be a wideout and run the occasional sweep gadget.


*Edit*

My point is people seem frustrated with the coaches potentially doing their job; holding a player accountable for their work. If Patterson isn't doing what is expected of him and it is clearly laid out to him. He should never see the field and as of right now I can't really look back and see any series that I think Patterson would have made the difference.

[Mothman]

I can't honestly grasp how its on Turner if Patterson cant play Wide Receiver...

That's not what I was saying. If the way they use Patterson becomes a "tell", that's on Turner. He can't allow that to happen.

My point is people seem frustrated with the coaches potentially doing their job; holding a player accountable for their work. If Patterson isn't doing what is expected of him and it is clearly laid out to him. He should never see the field and as of right now I can't really look back and see any series that I think Patterson would have made the difference.

There it is in a nutshell: "IF Patterson isn't doing what is expected of him". We have no compelling indication that's true, just assumptions based on his playing time. He was benched a little 8 regular season games ago because he was having some issues being where he was supposed to be consistently. That doesn't mean those issues remain as detrimental as they were, assuming they remain to a significant extent at all. For some reason, despite evidence to the contrary, many fans interpreted Patterson's benching as evidence of complete incompetence, Suddenly, it wasn't that he didn't have sufficient command of the timing and nuances of route-running. instead, he supposedly had a complete inability to run a route or play the wide receiver position at all, despite the fact that we have plays on film showing that he can do both. I fully understand the argument that if he's not doing what's asked of him, he can't be rewarded for it but where's the evidence that he's not doing what's asked of him?

It would be nice to see him get the opportunity to show whether he's made real progress or not, to show how much he can or can't contribute now that Peterson's back in the lineup to draw attention and Bridgewater has a little more experience.

[IrishViking]

That's not what I was saying. If the way they use Patterson becomes a "tell", that's on Turner. He can't allow that to happen.
There it is in a nutshell: "IF Patterson isn't doing what is expected of him". We have no compelling indication that's true, just assumptions based on his playing time. He was benched a little 8 regular season games ago because he was having some issues being where he was supposed to be consistently. That doesn't mean those issues remain as detrimental as they were, assuming they remain to a significant extent at all. For some reason, despite evidence to the contrary, many fans interpreted Patterson's benching as evidence of complete incompetence, Suddenly, it wasn't that he didn't have sufficient command of the timing and nuances of route-running. instead, he supposedly had a complete inability to run a route or play the wide receiver position at all, despite the fact that we have plays on film showing that he can do both. I fully understand the argument that if he's not doing what's asked of him, he can't be rewarded for it but where's the evidence that he's not doing what's asked of him?

It would be nice to see him get the opportunity to show whether he's made real progress or not, to show how much he can or can't contribute now that Peterson's back in the lineup to draw attention and Bridgewater has a little more experience.

So what I am getting from that is that you don't trust the Coaches practice day decisions about how Patterson is doing...


We should buy a controlling interest in the Vikings?

Honestly I guess the whole talk revolves around whether or not you trust Norv and Zim and the other coaches to evaluate the ability of its players. I trust that Patterson would be on the field if he gave us a better chance. Norv's already shown that he can adjust his game plan game to game for players (AP game 1 to 2).

[Mothman]

So what I am getting from that is that you don't trust the Coaches practice day decisions about how Patterson is doing...

If that's what I meant, that's what I would have written.

I'm not making assumptions about what's happening in practice.

Honestly I guess the whole talk revolves around whether or not you trust Norv and Zim and the other coaches to evaluate the ability of its players. I trust that Patterson would be on the field if he gave us a better chance.

Well, I just posted Zimmer's most recent "evaluation" above and he said Patterson continues to do a good job working and they intend to continue to get him in the mix. If your position is that we should have faith in the coaching staff's ability to evaluate players, that sounds like an endorsement to me.

Look, I'm just saying I find it hard to believe they couldn't get more out of Patterson with a little more effort to do so on Turner's part. Turner's an experienced, accomplished coach but he's certainly not perfect. His judgment isn't infallible. Just ask fans of the, what, seven different NFL teams for which he's coached?

[PurpleKoolaid]

As much as I would like to see CP get some more action, Im at at the point I would much rather see Diggs get those reps. And I think Diggs (or Waynes) could handle the KR job, as well as CP has done this year (other then pre season). The guys is electric, and has the 'it' quality that AD has. But, I dont think CP is the sharpest tack in the box, and going from 1 year of college experience, to the NFL starting WR job, is a bit much.

I think he should get 3 years (just like Teddy should before the masses go chop off his head), and I think they should line him up in 1 area. Since they didnt want him in the slot, just do the 3 WR set. Get him comfortable doing a few things likes screens, maybe a reverse. But hes a WR, not a RB. Give him some reps. I know I will be the first one complaining if CP messes up, but I want him to have some more reps. And just practice route running. Any spare minute he has. No more running in the mud or sand in 150 degree weather (or whatever he was doing), just practice running routes. He just doesnt have as much experience as other WR's do, train the basics. Plus, he wan Wallace on either end is going to scare a defense, especially if we throw it CP's way. And then hand off to AD.

It is a sad point for CP for a number of reasons. The Oline is sub par, so the passing game sucks right now. Wallace and CJ are Teddy's first reads. And I think Zimmer and Norv see something in CP we dont, thats having a negative effect. Or maybe they just dont like his practices. Again, CP really only has that one year of college exp, before being a WR. The upside of having him in games, may be HUGE. Cause he is one exciting player. Oh, and I hate all these darn touchbacks the NFL has now.

[Thaumaturgist]

Oh, and I hate all these darn touchbacks the NFL has now.

Agreed! They are bloody annoying. Who wants to see that? It's not exciting, and I feel like it just gives them ammo to remove kickoffs altogether. I don't know what was wrong with it in the first place.

[IrishViking]

Well, I just posted Zimmer's most recent "evaluation" above and he said Patterson continues to do a good job working and they intend to continue to get him in the mix. If your position is that we should have faith in the coaching staff's ability to evaluate players, that sounds like an endorsement to me.

Look, I'm just saying I find it hard to believe they couldn't get more out of Patterson with a little more effort to do so on Turner's part. Turner's an experienced, accomplished coach but he's certainly not perfect. His judgment isn't infallible. Just ask fans of the, what, seven different NFL teams for which he's coached?

I guess I have just never put any stock in what coaches tell us. I don't think any coach no matter how "blunt" or "real" is going to throw their players under the bus to the media unless they believe it will help. So if Zimmer SAYS he is doing good I don't really buy it until he puts him in and trust him to play.

I understand what you are saying about Norv but that is ignoring literally the last two games and how he completely changed his game plan to embrace Adrian's ability to run. Norv will change to adopt a playmaker into his game plan. He has just proven it. He hasn't done so for Patterson because... I don't know. But my thought is, if he did it for AP and didn't do it for CP he must have doubts about his value compared to what he would have to axe to get him more involved.

If CP gets more involved I wont mind in the slightest he is a dynamic player and I believe he does have the talent. But I do think he must a rather large or several smaller issue(s) to figure out in the opinion of the coaches before he see the field regularly.


But yeah...

Teddy??

[Jordysghost]

Agreed! They are bloody annoying. Who wants to see that? It's not exciting, and I feel like it just gives them ammo to remove kickoffs altogether. I don't know what was wrong with it in the first place.

Risk of injury was the problem.

[Mothman]

I guess I have just never put any stock in what coaches tell us. I don't think any coach no matter how "blunt" or "real" is going to throw their players under the bus to the media unless they believe it will help. So if Zimmer SAYS he is doing good I don't really buy it until he puts him in and trust him to play.

Of course, they did put him in last week when Johnson was hurt and Zimmer says they intend to keep him in the mix so doesn't that suggest they trust him to play?

I understand what you are saying about Norv but that is ignoring literally the last two games and how he completely changed his game plan to embrace Adrian's ability to run. Norv will change to adopt a playmaker into his game plan. He has just proven it. He hasn't done so for Patterson because... I don't know. But my thought is, if he did it for AP and didn't do it for CP he must have doubts about his value compared to what he would have to axe to get him more involved.

I see your point but I think you're comparing apples to oranges. Peterson's a former MVP and an NFL superstar. Turner looked a bit foolish in week 1 by under-utilizing him in a game where his offense was ineffective and the Vikes got mauled. Of course he modified his game plan. If he didn't do it on his own (and he probably did), Zimmer probably would instructed him to put the #@* ball in the hands of his best player!

If CP gets more involved I wont mind in the slightest he is a dynamic player and I believe he does have the talent. But I do think he must a rather large or several smaller issue(s) to figure out in the opinion of the coaches before he see the field regularly.

Something is keeping him off the field. All we can do is speculate and that's getting very old and frustrating.

[IrishViking]

Agreed, I Hope that he does get on the Field in a WR type way because I remember a few beautiful out route passes to him last year from Teddy Bridgewater

[Thaumaturgist]

Risk of injury was the problem.

At the risk of derailing this thread.

Do you know what the statistics are for getting hurt on a kickoff vs any other play from scrimmage is? I honestly don't know, and I can't seem to find anything quantifiable.

OK, I found this.
Concussions Decline After Change

[mansquatch]

Consistency seemed to be the issue last year. Who knows if it's still an issue? He hasn't played enough for us to find out and we don't have access to team practices.

Regarding your first point, Patterson isn't incompetent. He can burn a team deep. He did it in the preseason and he's shown an ability to get open downfield in the past. He doesn't need to be limited to screens and runs. He's demonstrated that he can do more than that as a receiver so I find the reoccurrence of that idea in thread after thread a bit maddening. Consistency may be an issue but I don't think cowardice, complacency, stupidity, incompetence, etc. are the problems. If defenses don't fear Patterson as a downfield threat the Vikings should use that and burn them deep because we know, from seeing him do it, that Patterson can indeed get open down the field!

I recall seeing him run one good deep route for a TD in Pre-Season, but also saw him run an in when Hill threw an out which got intercepted. We haven't seen him blow something up deep in what, a year? I get that maybe we've seen snippets here or there, but in the NFL game reps matter and he hasn't done it in game reps. That doesn't mean he can't do it, but for some reason this coaching staff thinks Wallace/Johnson/Wright give them a better chance to win. CP84 is definitely a better athletic talent than that group, yet he rides the bench. Either the coaches are stupid or something else is going on. The odds seem to favor the latter.

For all we know it could also be Teddy, or the types of play the line play is forcing them to run. (if it is forcing them), but that is all conjecture. For me the fact he is benched despite his talent is not promising.

[Mothman]

I recall seeing him run one good deep route for a TD in Pre-Season, but also saw him run an in when Hill threw an out which got intercepted. We haven't seen him blow something up deep in what, a year? I get that maybe we've seen snippets here or there, but in the NFL game reps matter and he hasn't done it in game reps.

He's not getting many game reps. That makes it difficult, no?

The Hill INT was an audible that didn't get communicated.

That doesn't mean he can't do it, but for some reason this coaching staff thinks Wallace/Johnson/Wright give them a better chance to win. CP84 is definitely a better athletic talent than that group, yet he rides the bench. Either the coaches are stupid or something else is going on. The odds seem to favor the latter.

They clearly favor the latter. As far as I'm concerned, it's a given that the coaches aren't stupid but they aren't infallible either and I think we can all agree they aren't above criticism. Even the best coaches make mistakes.

For all we know it could also be Teddy, or the types of play the line play is forcing them to run. (if it is forcing them), but that is all conjecture. For me the fact he is benched despite his talent is not promising.

I agree, it's not promising... I'm just not sure whose promise it speaks to most clearly. Turner is notoriously stubborn and he's "married" to his system. You may be correct that this could have to do with Bridgewater and his preferences or factors other than Patterson himself. I think it probably has to do with several factors, including perceived fit.

[mansquatch]

I will say this, I can see Sunday as the type of game where a guy like CP84 running plays similar to Percy Harvin in the 2012 SF game is a needed difference maker on offense against a highly talented defensive pass rush. That D will have to respect AP, and having to worry about CP84 might cause them to hesitate or be less likely to bring blitzes, assuming he can put up some yards on them early.


I've wondered if the trust issue is what keeps him off the field, but I can't settle on it because they obviously have no issues with him returning kickoffs. It might be that they don't trust him to figure out the reads, but even then you can still use the guy to run the short/quick hitting stuff where his athletic talent make him dangerous. For some reason, the coaches are not even willing to let him do that. It is a mystery, but the media have all but decided CP84 is a bust, so I doubt we'll get much insight until something changes.