"If only we had seen Cassel, Patterson and Rhodes all season

[Texas Vike]

Souhan's piece in the strib is spot on IMO:

With Patterson playing more at receiver, the Vikings have discovered that they have one of the most irrepressible talents in the NFL available to them as more than a kickoff returner. He gained 147 yards from scrimmage on Sunday without running a play he couldn’t have run the first week of the season. He should have been a bigger part of the offense all year.

More at link:
http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikin ... 93211.html

[mansquatch]

That article sums up exactly how I feel about the way this coaching staff has selceted it's starters this season. It is a very concerning trend during the Frasier era.

The flip side of this is that while I think Frasier and Co wait too long to replace guys, they also do seem to do a decent job of developing guys. Robinson was turning it around before he got injured. In some respects it makes me wonder if tossing grass is truly greener on the other side? I'm not 100% sold on this, although I'm still leaning towards the bad coaching camp. The fact the team has played with guts even during this terrible year is a positive sign for Frasier.

I do think if these mistakes hadn't been made our record would be better, but I can't blame them for starting Ponder at least the first 3 games. What I do not get is why they did the QB Carousel after the loss to Carolina. That to me is the biggest error the coaching staff/ GM made this year.

[Raptorman]

It's easy after the fact to say they should have been starting from day 1. But, we don't know how much they have improved over that time period. Josh Robinson had major problems in the beginning but it seemed before he was injured he was starting to come around. While I believe Patterson should have been on the field more in the beginning of the season.

[Webbfann]

And do you think it will change this week? Let's see what Frazier says today, no doubt "too early to say" who will be QB this week.

I do think if these mistakes hadn't been made our record would be better, but I can't blame them for starting Ponder at least the first 3 games. What I do not get is why they did the QB Carousel after the loss to Carolina. That to me is the biggest error the coaching staff/ GM made this year.

[Webbfann]

I really fail to see how keeping team motivated during a destroyed season that is largely the coaching's fault is a feather in the coaches cap. Even kidnapping victims sometimes sympathize with their kidnappers though...

[Texas Vike]

Good post, Mansquatch. I agree w/ you and Souhan that one of Frazier's biggest mistakes is the slowness w/ which he makes personnel decisions (Ponder instead of Cassel, Rhodes held back when he was clearly better than Robinson, Patterson not utilized enough early, etc.). He sticks with guys even when they are obviously not executing--it ultimately is just another reflection of his ultra-conservative approach.

OTOH, I see what you're saying about Frazier's virtues too: he's got guys still playing very hard in what is clearly a lost season.

[Mothman]

It's easy after the fact to say they should have been starting from day 1. But, we don't know how much they have improved over that time period.

Exactly! Where was the Souhan column about starting Audie Coles two months ago?

Good post, Mansquatch. I agree w/ you and Souhan that one of Frazier's biggest mistakes is the slowness w/ which he makes personnel decisions (Ponder instead of Cassel, Rhodes held back when he was clearly better than Robinson, Patterson not utilized enough early, etc.). He sticks with guys even when they are obviously not executing--it ultimately is just another reflection of his ultra-conservative approach.

I disagree. I think it reflects patience and Frazier taking the long view, doing what he thinks will ultimately be best for the players and the team. He knew going into the season that his young secondary was going to experience growing pains, particularly Josh Robinson since he was being asked to spend a great deal of time playing a position he'd never played before.

A lot of people are looking at recent results and projecting them backward, assuming the same results could have been achieved earlier but as Raptorman pointed out above, that overlooks the degree to which players may have improved along the way. Souhan wrote that Patterson "gained 147 yards from scrimmage on Sunday without running a play he couldn’t have run the first week of the season". Is that true? They ran him on some screens and reverses earlier in the season and he didn't turn them into big gains. Could he have run some of the routes he's run lately as well in week 3 as he runs them now? The coaching staff didn't think so and considering the "book' on Patterson coming out of college, I don't find that hard to believe.

[Texas Vike]

Exactly! Where was the Souhan column about starting Audie Coles two months ago?
I disagree. I think it reflects patience and Frazier taking the long view, doing what he thinks will ultimately be best for the players and the team. He knew going into the season that his young secondary was going to experience growing pains, particularly Josh Robinson since he was being asked to spend a great deal of time playing a position he'd never played before.

A lot of people are looking at recent results and projecting them backward, assuming the same results could have been achieved earlier but as Raptorman pointed out above, that overlooks the degree to which players may have improved along the way. Souhan wrote that Patterson "gained 147 yards from scrimmage on Sunday without running a play he couldn’t have run the first week of the season". Is that true? They ran him on some screens and reverses earlier in the season and he didn't turn them into big gains. Could he have run some of the routes he's run lately as well in week 3 as he runs them now? The coaching staff didn't think so and considering the "book' on Patterson coming out of college, I don't find that hard to believe.

So, Jim, you think Frazier's sticking with Ponder over Cassel has been an intelligent decision?

Also, when Rhodes FINALLY got into the starting lineup he looked the part immediately. He was very obviously superior to Robinson IMO.

[Raptorman]

Souhan gets paid to write. IF he really knew what he was talking about, he would be a NFL coach. He says nothing that anyone here on this board has not been saying all year. Only he get paid for it and a lot more people read it.

[mansquatch]

In my opinion the development question on these guys is cetainly open for debate. That is why I made my point and emphasized the conflict I feel about it.

However, the QB is a different story. After Cassel got stymied by Carolina the QB starter decsion making was a debacle. First we had the Freeman disaster in NY, followed by going back to Ponder for a miserable stretch outside of the Washington game. The biggest question is why the decision was made to start Freeman over Cassel in NY after 3 days of practice. That, IMO, was the worst decision of the season. It is worth noting I am not sure this was Frasier btw, it could have been Spielman. Not only was it bad on the field, it most likely also was a net negative to team morale. On top of this is also the question of why they thought Ponder gave the team a better chance to win than Cassel after the NY game. This to me is a highly questionable series of decisions.

Jim, I agree with your sentiment that Frasier takes the long view. However, I think there is a time and a place for it. Now is definitely the time to put a guy out there to take his lumps and learn. We're not in the hunt. However, when we were 0-2 or 0-3, then IMO, something should have been changed on defense as well as QB. There was still an opportunity to salvage the year. Quite simply, I have to ask given the above if Frasier would have started Cassel in London has Ponder not hurt his rib. I think he would have started Ponder and that to me is an issue.

[losperros]

The flip side of this is that while I think Frasier and Co wait too long to replace guys, they also do seem to do a decent job of developing guys. Robinson was turning it around before he got injured. In some respects it makes me wonder if tossing grass is truly greener on the other side? I'm not 100% sold on this, although I'm still leaning towards the bad coaching camp. The fact the team has played with guts even during this terrible year is a positive sign for Frasier.

I do think if these mistakes hadn't been made our record would be better, but I can't blame them for starting Ponder at least the first 3 games. What I do not get is why they did the QB Carousel after the loss to Carolina. That to me is the biggest error the coaching staff/ GM made this year.

I agree with you. Better decisions earlier in the season could have accounted for some wins. OTOH, seems to me that the Vikings players, including the veterans, are playing hard. They want to win and they're not giving up.

It's worth noting that Souhan brought up that point on Access Vikings, commenting that the team plays hard for Frazier. He also said that Frazier could head coach a winning team with a good QB and decent coordinators.

[Purple bruise]

So, Jim, you think Frazier's sticking with Ponder over Cassel has been an intelligent decision?

Also, when Rhodes FINALLY got into the starting lineup he looked the part immediately. He was very obviously superior to Robinson IMO.

In regards to this article it is 20/20 hindsight at its best. Early on, when Rhodes got into a game he was holding constantly and was called for it on several ocassions. He developed as the season progressed. These coaches saw him every day in practice and determined that he was not yet ready for a starting role. When he was thrust into that role he was improving, no doubt, game by game. I still believe that Robinson will turn out to be a good player with more time. He was the fastest player at the combine and is the fastest player on the team and is a pretty good tackler. We then look at Patterson, who has very suspect hands. Who would they bench? Simpson, who has has been steady to spectacular all season and has made many difficult catches. Would/should they have benched Jennings over Patterson. I do not think so. I still have a clear memory of Patterson dropping some key passes when he was given the opprotunity just a couple of games ago, one for a sure TD and one long pass that hit him in the hands down the side lines whick would have resulted in a crucial first down. And no I am not stupid enough to compare him in any way to Troy Williamson .
Regarding Cassel, he was fortunate, as was the team, to win against Pittsburgh. He had a sack fumble that was luckily recovered by his own team and lucked out when Rothlesburger fumbled at the end of the game near the goal line. When he got the next start he looked very average, to say the least and the team lost the game.
He did play a very good game Sunday and shoul have been rewarded with a win. So, in essence it is quite easy to look back and say what should have been done and what was not done cause it seems soooo clear now. That is not how works though and if it did, and I will use one quick example, Brady would have been playing long before Bledsoe got hurt that year.
20/20 hindsight, What a great thing

[mansquatch]

Hindsight is one thing, and I get that. But IMO, there have been several instances where a guy is not starting who by many rational indications would seem to be better than the guy in front of him. The QB situation this season is a prime example.

As I've stated, to me this is a concern. The issue is how long it has taken for guys to either develop or in the case of injuries a guy is replaced by his backup and the backup looks better than the starter. This begs the question of why didn't the guy start sooner? Obviously the coaches agree with this to some extent as Erin Henderson is healthy and yet he is playing Will while Cole continues to play Mike. You have to ask "Would EH have stopped playing Mike in favor of Cole had he not had off the field issues?" All indications are that the answer to this is No. This to me is a problem.

Note that this is a different issue than saying "what if they had started week 1." I agree with question of their development from then to now. However, we still wonder if say in the case of Mike, whether Cole was good enough to replace EH in week 4 or 5 or 6 vs Week 13. We'll never know on this one.

We also saw this with Patterson early on. He is raw, was raw, etc. But when he got on the field he was electric and even Frasier said during pressers that this needed to be fixed. Again, why was it a problem in the first place? Why does it take an injury to get some of these guys on the field?

[Texas Vike]

In regards to this article it is 20/20 hindsight at its best. Early on, when Rhodes got into a game he was holding constantly and was called for it on several ocassions. He developed as the season progressed. These coaches saw him every day in practice and determined that he was not yet ready for a starting role. When he was thrust into that role he was improving, no doubt, game by game. I still believe that Robinson will turn out to be a good player with more time. He was the fastest player at the combine and is the fastest player on the team and is a pretty good tackler. We then look at Patterson, who has very suspect hands. Who would they bench? Simpson, who has has been steady to spectacular all season and has made many difficult catches. Would/should they have benched Jennings over Patterson. I do not think so. I still have a clear memory of Patterson dropping some key passes when he was given the opprotunity just a couple of games ago, one for a sure TD and one long pass that hit him in the hands down the side lines whick would have resulted in a crucial first down. And no I am not stupid enough to compare him in any way to Troy Williamson .
Regarding Cassel, he was fortunate, as was the team, to win against Pittsburgh. He had a sack fumble that was luckily recovered by his own team and lucked out when Rothlesburger fumbled at the end of the game near the goal line. When he got the next start he looked very average, to say the least and the team lost the game.
He did play a very good game Sunday and shoul have been rewarded with a win. So, in essence it is quite easy to look back and say what should have been done and what was not done cause it seems soooo clear now. That is not how works though and if it did, and I will use one quick example, Brady would have been playing long before Bledsoe got hurt that year.
20/20 hindsight, What a great thing

It is not hindsight if a lot of posters were saying it in September. It was clear to many on this board that Cassel gave us the best chance to win from early on in the season.

Robinson was failing BIG TIME, over and over. Frazier didn't make any changes until injury forced him to and LO AND BEHOLD his substitute, Rhodes, comes on and looks worlds better.

Patterson wouldn't need to cut into Simpson or Jennings' playing time necessarily. Many of us were calling for fewer 2 TE sets to get our best talent on the field. Then again, Ponder doesn't seem to like throwing to WRs much (except for Simpson), so maybe that was their thinking? Who knows.

Frazier is slow to react to clear evidence and it will be his downfall. it's too bad because there are plenty of things he does right.

[mansquatch]

Texas I agree. There are many things Frasier does right, but the way he is handling some of these starters is questionable to a point where you wonder if it has cost us some wins. That is the part that is indefensible to me.

I will say that if Frasier had a good QB, a lot of this would probable be moot, so it begs the question of whether firing Frasier is a sound move. IMO, the poor QBs Frasier has had to work with in his time as HC is a huge contributor to his W/L record as Vikings HC.

It is easy to blame coaching, and for the reasons in this thread I've been guilty of it. But I'm undecided on whether canning Frasier will be a net positive...