Vikings Message Board.Com

http://www.foxsports.com/north/story/mi ... ity-030615

To bring out Patterson's talent, Zimmer asked the receiver to work with someone in the offseason. Zimmer wouldn't divulge who he wanted to mentor Patterson.

Two months into the offseason, the plan is unfolding. At the NFL Scouting Combine, Zimmer said Patterson has been in contact with his new muse. Patterson even stepped out on his own to work on developing his game, Zimmer told KFAN radio.
"I communicated with (Patterson) once and gave him all the information of who he needs to contact," Zimmer told KFAN's Paul Allen from the combine. "That has (happened) and I found out recently that, on his own, he decided he wanted to do this other thing too, which I think is a good thing for him. So he's off doing that thing right now."

Zimmer didn't offer any details but said he likes the approach Patterson has taken.

Part of the plan also includes changes on the coaching staff's part, Zimmer said.

"Yeah, we have to do a better job of manufacturing touches for him," Zimmer said during his time on the podium at the combine. "Cordarelle's a very talented young man who's been in a bunch of different systems. And Cordarrelle is doing a good job so far this offseason. So there's a lot of things we have to do a better job with him. And in saying that he has to do a better job himself, so it is a two-way street on this."

Thanks Jim.
"....Manufacturing touches for him...."

I don't know about you but to me, this screams AD and McKinnon as decoys in the backfield and a misdirection sweep to Patterson!!

Sorry, couldn't resist

VikingPaul73 wrote:Thanks Jim.
"....Manufacturing touches for him...."

I don't know about you but to me, this screams AD and McKinnon as decoys in the backfield and a misdirection sweep to Patterson!!

I read it as "bubble screen".

Just kidding...

Seriously, I'm quite happy to read Zimmer saying the coaching staff needs to change their approach with Patterson a little too. I was disappointed with the way they handled him last year. My perceptions of the situation might be off the mark but it seemed like Norv tried to shoehorn Patterson into his system rather than making more of an effort to take advantage of the unique talent at his disposal. There has to be a better middle ground than what they achieved last year.

Hopefully, Patterson's offseason efforts will better prepare him to handle his role in the offensive system and the coaches will be a little more imaginative when calling plays for Patterson.

Mothman wrote: I read it as "bubble screen".

Just kidding...

Seriously, I'm quite happy to read Zimmer saying the coaching staff needs to change their approach with Patterson a little too. I was disappointed with the way they handled him last year. My perceptions of the situation might be off the mark but it seemed like Norv tried to shoehorn Patterson into his system rather than making more of an effort to take advantage of the unique talent at his disposal. There has to be a better middle ground than what they achieved last year.

Hopefully, Patterson's offseason efforts will better prepare him to handle his role in the offensive system and the coaches will be a little more imaginative when calling plays for Patterson.

I think longterm it is in both Patterson's and the Vikings's best interest to "shoehorn" Patterson into turner's system. I'm not saying its mutually exclusive that he can't learn the system while having more "manufactured touches", but if he doesn't develop into a more well rounded player he won't be a Viking once his contract is up anyway. that has to be the priority.

I agree with Jim.
OK 3RBs including Patterson might be a bit silly. But I think the difference between a good coach and a great one is the ability to be flexible and adapt your scheme to incorporate available talent rather than just force everyone into a specific system.

fiestavike wrote:I think longterm it is in both Patterson's and the Vikings's best interest to "shoehorn" Patterson into turner's system. I'm not saying its mutually exclusive that he can't learn the system while having more "manufactured touches", but if he doesn't develop into a more well rounded player he won't be a Viking once his contract is up anyway. that has to be the priority.

It's a given that he needs to develop into a more well-rounded player but they seemed to expect that to happen overnight and when it didn't, they benched him instead of adapting and coming up with some ways to get more production out of him. As Zimmer said, it's a two-way street. Turner appeared inflexible and unimaginative when it came to Patterson.

Mothman wrote: It's a given that he needs to develop into a more well-rounded player but they seemed to expect that to happen overnight and when it didn't, they benched him instead of adapting and coming up with some ways to get more production out of him. As Zimmer said, it's a two-way street. Turner appeared inflexible and unimaginative when it came to Patterson.

Which is odd because I remember when Norv came here there were reports of him adding 20 plays just for Patterson.

Mothman wrote: It's a given that he needs to develop into a more well-rounded player but they seemed to expect that to happen overnight and when it didn't, they benched him instead of adapting and coming up with some ways to get more production out of him. As Zimmer said, it's a two-way street. Turner appeared inflexible and unimaginative when it came to Patterson.

I'm ok with that. I think there has to be a minimum standard whether coaching, teaching, or working in management. Patterson wasn't able to live up to that last year. I don't think whatever added production they might have been able to get out of him with manufactured touches is worth deviating from that standard, even if it means developing a much less gifted player like Thielen in Patterson's place. He's got to learn to do the basic things asked of him in Turener's offense or he needs to make room for someone who can, despite his incredible physical talent. To me, there is an element of giving Patterson an out by putting him on the field for gadget plays or "manufactured touches" instead of giving him a minimum requirement and expecting him to meet if he wants to be on the field. I applaud them for pulling him off the field instead of allowing him to continue getting playing time when he was struggling as he was.

Thielen again? C'mon guys...at his best he's not ever going to be more than a role player.

DK Sweets wrote:Thielen again? C'mon guys...at his best he's not ever going to be more than a role player.

It's like when everyone wanted Ryan Mallett. WTF???

DK Sweets wrote:Thielen again? C'mon guys...at his best he's not ever going to be more than a role player.

VMB needs a team underdog to cheer for, and Mr. Mankato, aka Adam Thielen is that guy. Why not, he's a homegrown product and was a long shot to make the roster. Has a good storyline. Can't help but like the guy.

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

DK Sweets wrote:Thielen again? C'mon guys...at his best he's not ever going to be more than a role player.

Are you making mention to my reference of Thielen? If so, I think you got the wrong impression about the point I was making.

Mothman wrote: I read it as "bubble screen".

Just kidding...

Seriously, I'm quite happy to read Zimmer saying the coaching staff needs to change their approach with Patterson a little too. I was disappointed with the way they handled him last year. My perceptions of the situation might be off the mark but it seemed like Norv tried to shoehorn Patterson into his system rather than making more of an effort to take advantage of the unique talent at his disposal. There has to be a better middle ground than what they achieved last year.

Hopefully, Patterson's offseason efforts will better prepare him to handle his role in the offensive system and the coaches will be a little more imaginative when calling plays for Patterson.

I actually wasn't disappointed with the way Turner handled Patterson last year. I would have liked to see him on the field more because he can be so exciting, but that's me personally. From a 'what's best for the team' standpoint, it may have been for the best. The offense works best when people are in the right position in this scheme. Though in most schemes this is the case, Turner's seems to be even more sensitive to it.

I also think it helps Patterson's development as a receiver rather than having him be strictly as YAC guy who relies on his athleticism. Instead, if he wants to be a major player on offense he has to learn the scheme properly and be a more polished receiver. It sounds like that, to some degree, is helping Patterson focus on getting better. Knowing how raw Patterson was, I'm ok with him needing more time to mature as a receiver and I'm glad both sides are trying to make that happen.

I think the 'manufacturing touches' option won't happen until 2016 if it happens at all. If Patterson can't learn the offense he won't be on the field very much, at least in the short term. His potential with the ball in his hands doesn't outweigh the possibility of a turnover if he's out of place and Turner doesn't strike me as the kind of coach that is going to run too many reverses/bubble screens in one game ... and that's not realistic anyway long term. It's not all that difficult to cover a receiver if you're pretty sure he's not leaving the line of scrimmage.

I agree that *if* Patterson can't learn the system then they have to start striving for middle ground but I feel like that's a last resort. If they have to change things around just for Patterson I will almost take it as a sign that they've given up on him being able to fill the role properly. Now, that's not to say he can't still be a good player with value but I would envision him maxing out at a Percy Harvin level of production which isn't what you hope for in a 1st rounder but isn't nothing. Instead, if he can truly learn his craft he could be a superstar in this league.

Cliff wrote: I actually wasn't disappointed with the way Turner handled Patterson last year. I would have liked to see him on the field more because he can be so exciting, but that's me personally. From a 'what's best for the team' standpoint, it may have been for the best. The offense works best when people are in the right position in this scheme. Though in most schemes this is the case, Turner's seems to be even more sensitive to it.

I also think it helps Patterson's development as a receiver rather than having him be strictly as YAC guy who relies on his athleticism. Instead, if he wants to be a major player on offense he has to learn the scheme properly and be a more polished receiver. It sounds like that, to some degree, is helping Patterson focus on getting better. Knowing how raw Patterson was, I'm ok with him needing more time to mature as a receiver and I'm glad both sides are trying to make that happen.

I think the 'manufacturing touches' option won't happen until 2016 if it happens at all. If Patterson can't learn the offense he won't be on the field very much, at least in the short term. His potential with the ball in his hands doesn't outweigh the possibility of a turnover if he's out of place and Turner doesn't strike me as the kind of coach that is going to run too many reverses/bubble screens in one game ... and that's not realistic anyway long term. It's not all that difficult to cover a receiver if you're pretty sure he's not leaving the line of scrimmage.

I agree that *if* Patterson can't learn the system then they have to start striving for middle ground but I feel like that's a last resort. If they have to change things around just for Patterson I will almost take it as a sign that they've given up on him being able to fill the role properly. Now, that's not to say he can't still be a good player with value but I would envision him maxing out at a Percy Harvin level of production which isn't what you hope for in a 1st rounder but isn't nothing. Instead, if he can truly learn his craft he could be a superstar in this league.

well said. I agree.

Cliff wrote: I actually wasn't disappointed with the way Turner handled Patterson last year. I would have liked to see him on the field more because he can be so exciting, but that's me personally. From a 'what's best for the team' standpoint, it may have been for the best. The offense works best when people are in the right position in this scheme. Though in most schemes this is the case, Turner's seems to be even more sensitive to it.

I also think it helps Patterson's development as a receiver rather than having him be strictly as YAC guy who relies on his athleticism. Instead, if he wants to be a major player on offense he has to learn the scheme properly and be a more polished receiver. It sounds like that, to some degree, is helping Patterson focus on getting better. Knowing how raw Patterson was, I'm ok with him needing more time to mature as a receiver and I'm glad both sides are trying to make that happen.

I think the 'manufacturing touches' option won't happen until 2016 if it happens at all. If Patterson can't learn the offense he won't be on the field very much, at least in the short term. His potential with the ball in his hands doesn't outweigh the possibility of a turnover if he's out of place and Turner doesn't strike me as the kind of coach that is going to run too many reverses/bubble screens in one game ... and that's not realistic anyway long term. It's not all that difficult to cover a receiver if you're pretty sure he's not leaving the line of scrimmage.

I agree that *if* Patterson can't learn the system then they have to start striving for middle ground but I feel like that's a last resort. If they have to change things around just for Patterson I will almost take it as a sign that they've given up on him being able to fill the role properly. Now, that's not to say he can't still be a good player with value but I would envision him maxing out at a Percy Harvin level of production which isn't what you hope for in a 1st rounder but isn't nothing. Instead, if he can truly learn his craft he could be a superstar in this league.

Good post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk