Preseason Week 3 - Minnesota Vikings vs. Oakland Raiders

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

fiestavike
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4959
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
x 395

Re: Preseason Week 3 - Minnesota Vikings vs. Oakland Raiders

Post by fiestavike »

Mothman wrote:

I'm not suggesting anything of the kind. I'm simply unwilling to view the situation as that extreme and I that seems to be where we disagree. Patterson's not incompetent. It's an exaggeration to say he can't do his job with the underlying implication that he can't do it at all. There's no reason he should be limited to nothing but kickoff returns this season and using him in the offense isn't a question of "asking 10 other guys to change how they play". It's simply a matter of incorporating what he does well and I doubt that would even require changing the playbook.

And I'm not saying he can't run a slant route, for example, but the he can't run it correctly a high enough percentage of the time to merit being on the field. Therefore he doesn't meet the minimum standard of any competent coach who has a better option. If he were able to, I am sure he would be on the field, because as we both acknowledge, he is a superior athlete. Its not fair to the other players on the field or the team as a whole to let him play.
"You like that!"
-- Cap'n Spazz Cousins
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Preseason Week 3 - Minnesota Vikings vs. Oakland Raiders

Post by Mothman »

fiestavike wrote: And I'm not saying he can't run a slant route, for example, but the he can't run it correctly a high enough percentage of the time to merit being on the field. Therefore he doesn't meet the minimum standard of any competent coach who has a better option. If he were able to, I am sure he would be on the field, because as we both acknowledge, he is a superior athlete. Its not fair to the other players on the field or the team as a whole to let him play.
You've reduced the situation to a false dichotomy when there are obviously more options available. It simply isn't as dire or extreme as you're making it out to be. Patterson's actually having a pretty good preseason. It's been marred by a few mistakes but he's also been as productive as Charles Johnson and more productive than $10 million dollar man Mike Wallace. I realize it's just preseason but he's demonstrating that he has value on the field. Mistakes can be corrected and if making one or two means a player isn't meeting the minimum standard necessary to even see the field the Vikes are rapidly going to run out of players worth fielding.

There's simply no legitimate reason why Patterson, if healthy, should end up only seeing the field on kickoffs this season. None. If his grasp of the full playbook is insufficient, reduce his responsibilities and make sure he's proficient in what he IS asked to do but again, he's not incompetent. He's capable of playing and playing well. It would be irresponsible to reduce his role in the offense to virtually nothing.
fiestavike
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4959
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
x 395

Re: Preseason Week 3 - Minnesota Vikings vs. Oakland Raiders

Post by fiestavike »

Mothman wrote:
You've reduced the situation to a false dichotomy when there are obviously more options available. It simply isn't as dire or extreme as you're making it out to be. Patterson's actually having a pretty good preseason. It's been marred by a few mistakes but he's also been as productive as Charles Johnson and more productive than $10 million dollar man Mike Wallace. I realize it's just preseason but he's demonstrating that he has value on the field. Mistakes can be corrected and if making one or two means a player isn't meeting the minimum standard necessary to even see the field the Vikes are rapidly going to run out of players worth fielding.

There's simply no legitimate reason why Patterson, if healthy, should end up only seeing the field on kickoffs this season. None. If his grasp of the full playbook is insufficient, reduce his responsibilities and make sure he's proficient in what he IS asked to do but again, he's not incompetent. He's capable of playing and playing well. It would be irresponsible to reduce his role in the offense to virtually nothing.
I don't know. It was significant enough to get him removed from the field last year and prevent him from playing with the 1s all offseason. The coaches seem to think his flaws are pretty significant...
"You like that!"
-- Cap'n Spazz Cousins
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Preseason Week 3 - Minnesota Vikings vs. Oakland Raiders

Post by Mothman »

fiestavike wrote:I don't know. It was significant enough to get him removed from the field last year and prevent him from playing with the 1s all offseason. The coaches seem to think his flaws are pretty significant...
The coaches are just trying to develop him into a better player. His game needs some work but not starting is not equivalent to "not worth playing" or "so bad it's unfair to his teammates to put him on the field". Just because shortcomings in his game are currently keeping him from starting, it doesn't automatically (or even logically) follow that he shouldn't play at all or that merely putting him on the field is unfair to his teammates.

Let's drop it for now. We're going in circles and I think the likelihood that Patterson will only end up returning kickoffs and will spend the year watching the offense from the bench is basically zero anyway. I have no doubt they'll find snaps for him.
User avatar
VikingLord
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8227
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: The Land of the Ice and Snow
x 930

Re: Preseason Week 3 - Minnesota Vikings vs. Oakland Raiders

Post by VikingLord »

Mothman wrote:Let's drop it for now. We're going in circles and I think the likelihood that Patterson will only end up returning kickoffs and will spend the year watching the offense from the bench is basically zero anyway. I have no doubt they'll find snaps for him.
I think so too, and in some ways, that might be the best thing from the perspective of both the Vikings and Patterson.
fiestavike
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4959
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
x 395

Re: Preseason Week 3 - Minnesota Vikings vs. Oakland Raiders

Post by fiestavike »

Mothman wrote: The coaches are just trying to develop him into a better player. His game needs some work but not starting is not equivalent to "not worth playing" or "so bad it's unfair to his teammates to put him on the field". Just because shortcomings in his game are currently keeping him from starting, it doesn't automatically (or even logically) follow that he shouldn't play at all or that merely putting him on the field is unfair to his teammates.

Let's drop it for now. We're going in circles and I think the likelihood that Patterson will only end up returning kickoffs and will spend the year watching the offense from the bench is basically zero anyway. I have no doubt they'll find snaps for him.
Fair enough, I just want to clarify that I was reacting to your assertion that Turner should be fired if Patterson is only used on kickoffs and as a gadget player/decoy. I think there is a totally justifiable rational for not using him in another capacity until he improves. Its not entirely clear that you disagree with this point based on your subsequent comments, merely that you disagree with a handful of things I never said, such as "He shouldn't play at all" or "merely putting him on the field is unfair to him teammates" or that I've made some "underlying implication that he can't do [his job] at all" by asserting that he can't do his job consistently enough. I would hate to end the discussion without at least clarifying these points since we typically are able to communicate pretty effectively with one another. Cheers! :v):
"You like that!"
-- Cap'n Spazz Cousins
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Preseason Week 3 - Minnesota Vikings vs. Oakland Raiders

Post by Mothman »

fiestavike wrote:[Fair enough, I just want to clarify that I was reacting to your assertion that Turner should be fired if Patterson is only used on kickoffs and as a gadget player/decoy.


That was never my assertion so we may have been talking past each other from the start. Gadget plays and acting as a decoy didn't appear to be part of the equation, just kickoffs, which is why I made that comment about looking for a new offensive coordinator. To clarify, I was responding to this::
"As I've indicated, Patterson has immense potential but as of right now I think he has very little value to this team, in part because of the depth at WR in front of him.

I just don't think 1-2 kickoff returns per game...which is probably how many won't go out the back of the endzone, give Patterson the potential to make much impact this year. And we can say "27 yard return" but when the ball winds up at the 18 its a -2 yard return."
I was exaggerating for effect to underline that I thought the idea of relegating Patterson to nothing but kickoff duty all year would be the wrong move and that Turner should use him on offense, which I assume he will do.
I think there is a totally justifiable rational for not using him in another capacity until he improves. Its not entirely clear that you disagree with this point based on your subsequent comments...
I actually do disagree... that was the whole point and I obviously didn't make it clearly enough. Sorry. I think Patterson should be getting offensive snaps in every game. Part of their strategy should be to create opportunities for him to make big plays because he's proven he can do that for them.
...merely that you disagree with a handful of things I never said, such as "He shouldn't play at all" or "merely putting him on the field is unfair to him teammates" or that I've made some "underlying implication that he can't do [his job] at all" by asserting that he can't do his job consistently enough. I would hate to end the discussion without at least clarifying these points since we typically are able to communicate pretty effectively with one another. Cheers! :v):
Cheers. :)
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: Preseason Week 3 - Minnesota Vikings vs. Oakland Raiders

Post by dead_poet »

Mothman wrote:I actually do disagree... that was the whole point and I obviously didn't make it clearly enough. Sorry. I think Patterson should be getting offensive snaps in every game. Part of their strategy should be to create opportunities for him to make big plays because he's proven he can do that for them.
I can see both sides of this. No question he can be electric with the ball in his hands but he has also shown (consistently) that he is not in the spot he's supposed to be or running a route as sharply/precisely as needed by a starting NFL wide receiver, especially one that can be trusted in a precise/timing offense like Turner's. It's the Patterson Conundrum.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
IrishViking
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1631
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 11:02 am

Re: Preseason Week 3 - Minnesota Vikings vs. Oakland Raiders

Post by IrishViking »

Patterson's cat


He has both unlimited potential and no potential until he proves one.
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: Preseason Week 3 - Minnesota Vikings vs. Oakland Raiders

Post by dead_poet »

In case their was doubt...
@MasterStrib "It was an audible at the line of scrimmage" Norv Turner on Shaun Hill's INT. Turner said Patterson ran wrong route, Hill overthrew #Vikings
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
fiestavike
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4959
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
x 395

Re: Preseason Week 3 - Minnesota Vikings vs. Oakland Raiders

Post by fiestavike »

dead_poet wrote: I can see both sides of this. No question he can be electric with the ball in his hands but he has also shown (consistently) that he is not in the spot he's supposed to be or running a route as sharply/precisely as needed by a starting NFL wide receiver, especially one that can be trusted in a precise/timing offense like Turner's. It's the Patterson Conundrum.
I think at the end of the day our disagreement comes down to whether Patterson, at his current skill level, should be on the field before Wallace, Johnson or Wright when the Vikings are running some part of their base offense. My position is that he shouldn't be. I only see him on the field if they are running a "wrinkle" play designed for Patterson (or designed to take advantage of him as a decoy). Jim's position, if I understand it, (forgive me if I am wrong) is that sometimes he should replace one of the aforementioned WRs in the base offense. I'm just speculating here that the reasons for that are a) Patterson has upside as a "big play" waiting to happen and b) Patterson can't develop as quickly from the sideline. Both true.

Nonetheless, to me his "big play" capability doesn't trump the importance of a consistent rhythm within a timing offense. In addition, his "big play" ability cuts both ways, as we witnessed in the last preseason game on two occasions, where he ran the wrong route and couldn't line up correctly (potentially "big plays"). How many more occasions are more subtle is really unknowable but again, I point to the fact that the coaches felt the need to replace him as evidence that he too frequently is screwing up on plays where the casual fan doesn't ever see the screw up. These could be "big plays" in the form of not completing a pass, not converting a 3rd down, forcing a QB to hold the ball, to take a sack, forcing an Olineman to block for an extra second, to hold a DE, etc. We just say, "put Patterson out there, he might score a touchdown" but how many points might he be taking off the board by his goof ups or lack of skill? There's no precise way to calculate that (someone in another thread put forward an erroneous idea that if Patterson scores 9 touchdowns thats +9 touchdowns for the team on the year, clearly not true. It could in fact be plus more than 9 or minus more than 9, but its never that simplistic.) Obviously that is a calculation coaches would need to consider before pulling a dynamic player off the field. And yet they pulled him off the field. I find that telling, and I trust this coaching staff (Norv Turner is one of the best ever) to make the correct decision there both for the overall offense and the development of a young QB.
"You like that!"
-- Cap'n Spazz Cousins
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Preseason Week 3 - Minnesota Vikings vs. Oakland Raiders

Post by Mothman »

dead_poet wrote:In case their was doubt...
Thanks. Here's more:
Chris Tomasson ‏@christomasson 55m55 minutes ago
Norv Turner said pick Shaun Hill threw last week fault of Hill & Cordarrelle Patterson. Patterson ran wrong route HiIl shouldn't have thrown
VikingUpdate.com ‏@VikingUpdate 1h1 hour ago
Norv Turner said the Shaun Hill interception was an audible that didn't get communicated, Patterson ran wrong route. #Vikings
You can hear Norv's actual response at the link below. It's at the 5:23 mark in the video.

http://www.vikings.com/media-vault/vide ... bc3992aee2
mosscarter
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 2:34 am

Re: Preseason Week 3 - Minnesota Vikings vs. Oakland Raiders

Post by mosscarter »

nobody is questioning patterson's athletic potential, but i think it is becoming quite clear that he is not doing a good job whatsoever at the wr position. if he doesn't actually learn to play the position, then all he will be relegated to is a kick returner and a gadget player. he has one touchdown and not many catches in the preseason and he's had significant time on the field. he blew right by the guy on his td, but no one is questioning his speed either. maybe they can just send him on straight go routes once or twice a game and see if teddy can hit him on play action.
User avatar
Texas Vike
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4672
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:52 am
x 405

Re: Preseason Week 3 - Minnesota Vikings vs. Oakland Raiders

Post by Texas Vike »

Finally caught this game on NFLN DVR.

Judging by this thread I expected doom and gloom. I thought they looked pretty good. Teddy looked very alert and crisp. He had a few throws that looked like they were catchable that WRs dropped (Wallace admitted as much, Rudy's was just a tad high, but he could've had it, Jarius should have caught his IMO). He's looking sharp.

Lunch pail guys took the night: Asiata and Ford. Sherels too. Diggs got a nice punt return in at the end too. Fun to see Zimmer dropping some F bombs all the way through: he cussed out Loefler on the 49 yard miss (last FG attempt) for the high snap and Babs for the idiotic holding penalty on a PAT attempt. Love that fire from my coach!

Glad they play here in DFW next week... I'll get to see it live. I'm not giving Jerry a cent... I'll grill on my new smoker and enjoy the game at home!
Post Reply