Irvin just confirmed he was Patterson's mystery coach

[Mothman]

Of course you don't.

You tell people like me not to make a big deal out of his refusal to do what his coaches ask, yet you repeatedly make a big deal out of those same coaches refusing to play him. You honestly don't see the correlation?

Yes, I see that you're saying one "big deal" is like another "big deal" but I don't think the two situations themselves are equivalent.

You said we shouldn't make a big deal about it.

I said I think it's overblown and I said I don't think it makes much sense to make a big deal out of it. I didn't say what you should do. If you want to make a big deal about it, please, go right ahead.

[fiestavike]

At the end of the day, this question comes down to whether or not you trust Zimmer to create a culture of accountability. If you do, you assume there is a good reason that Patterson isn't playing. If you don't, you want to know why Patterson isn't playing. You can only assume the coaches are making a mistake.

There is "evidence" to support whatever interpretation you want. Patterson not working out with Irvin, Patterson being featured negatively in the media film sessions, Patterson acting stupid and getting penalties, Patterson running the wrong route, Zimmer criticizing him in post-game presser, etc. Or, Patterson making a big play, Patterson scoring TDs, Patterson breaking tackles...clearly he has real ability. None of this is going to be conclusive proof of anything, but you can use it support your assumptions.

As for me, I believe in Zimmer a lot more than I believe in Patterson.

[Mothman]

At the end of the day, this question comes down to whether or not you trust Zimmer to create a culture of accountability. If you do, you assume there is a good reason that Patterson isn't playing. If you don't, you want to know why Patterson isn't playing. You can only assume the coaches are making a mistake.

My problem with the situation is that I don't find it so black and white. Patterson has played this year, usually as a blocker. However, they've thrown to him a couple of times and completed passes. They run him once in a while. If Zimmer has created a "culture of accountability" in which Patterson doesn't deserve playing time because he hasn't earned it, why does he get to play at all? They've been willing to give the ball to him a mere 4 times this season but 2 of those 4 plays went for solid gains of 9 yards and none of them ended in mistakes or disasters. Knowing that he has playmaking ability, why not at least try to expand on that?

I find the "culture of accountability" explanation lacking anyway. Clemmings has played poorly and made mistake after mistake but he's out there every week. They take their lumps with him for the sake of development. Wallace has become as invisible as a starting WR can get but he's still out there every week. Where's the "accountability" for those players?

As for me, I believe in Zimmer a lot more than I believe in Patterson.

It's not a question of belief for me at all. I just want to know what the heck is going on and why a potential asset that required a significant investment has been languishing away on the bench all season while the offense struggles to score points, particularly using the passing game. The media has been a complete disappointment in providing answers on this topic.

[J. Kapp 11]

Yes, I see that you're saying one "big deal" is like another "big deal" but I don't think the two situations themselves are equivalent.
I said I think it's overblown and I said I don't think it makes much sense to make a big deal out of it. I didn't say what you should do. If you want to make a big deal about it, please, go right ahead.

Point taken.

I honestly don't know what to make of this, Jim. It pains me that a talent like CP isn't contributing. I was a huge advocate of the Vikings drafting him. I watched his film from Tennessee, and I was amazed that a guy his size could change direction so quickly. He's an athletic freak who really seems to love playing the game. Obviously, SOMETHING is going on ... his attitude, his work, the coaches have given up on him ... SOMETHING. You just don't bury a talent like him on the end of the bench without a good reason.

So here's where I sit ... Mike Zimmer is doing almost everything else right with this team. He's really earned my trust. I had no delusions that this team would be 8-3 and leading the division at this point. I'm over-the-top happy with the job he's doing. So ... all things being equal, I trust Mike Zimmer's decisions, including those with CP. If we were 3-8 instead of 8-3, it would be a different story.

The thing about the Irvin comments is that it's a layer of the onion skin peeled back. Mike Zimmer arranged for CP to work with Irvin, CP declined. It's a fact ... no more, no less ... and I agree with you that it doesn't say anything by itself. But since I trust the Vikings coaches, adding this fact to that trust leans me ever so slightly toward believing CP is more a problem than his coaches. It certainly doesn't prove anything. However, there's even less proof that the coaches are the problem.

That's all I'm saying. We just don't have all the facts. And I sure didn't mean to start a fight about it.

[fiestavike]

I find the "culture of accountability" explanation lacking anyway. Clemmings has played poorly and made mistake after mistake but he's out there every week. They take their lumps with him for the sake of development. Wallace has become as invisible as a starting WR can get but he's still out there every week. Where's the "accountability" for those players?

It sounds like you are assuming accountability only relates to what players are doing on the field, and ignoring the film room, the meeting room, the practice field, the off-season, etc. these are all areas that, as fans, we don't get a good vantage of. They seem much more likely to hold the explanation one way or the other.

Someone posted an article in another thread about Zimmer's meetings and how they require real focus across the board. It may well be that players who can't meet the standard there are not going to be put in position to make those kind of mental mistakes on gameday. Perhaps they would mostly be given snaps where they will be used as a blocker, or taking handoffs.

I'm not suggesting this IS so, but it could be. My point is we don't know 85 percent of what goes on in the organization.

[Mothman]

Point taken.

I honestly don't know what to make of this, Jim. It pains me that a talent like CP isn't contributing. I was a huge advocate of the Vikings drafting him. I watched his film from Tennessee, and I was amazed that a guy his size could change direction so quickly. He's an athletic freak who really seems to love playing the game. Obviously, SOMETHING is going on ... his attitude, his work, the coaches have given up on him ... SOMETHING. You just don't bury a talent like him on the end of the bench without a good reason.

So here's where I sit ... Mike Zimmer is doing almost everything else right with this team. He's really earned my trust. I had no delusions that this team would be 8-3 and leading the division at this point. I'm over-the-top happy with the job he's doing. So ... all things being equal, I trust Mike Zimmer's decisions, including those with CP. If we were 3-8 instead of 8-3, it would be a different story.

The thing about the Irvin comments is that it's a layer of the onion skin peeled back. Mike Zimmer arranged for CP to work with Irvin, CP declined. It's a fact ... no more, no less ... and I agree with you that it doesn't say anything by itself. But since I trust the Vikings coaches, adding this fact to that trust leans me ever so slightly toward believing CP is more a problem than his coaches. It certainly doesn't prove anything. However, there's even less proof that the coaches are the problem.

That's all I'm saying. We just don't have all the facts. And I sure didn't mean to start a fight about it.

No worries.

My frustration with the Irvin meeting subject simply stems from the fact that it's old news. We now have a name to put on the accomplished WR Zimmer wanted Patterson to work with but beyond that, it's all information we've known about for at least 5 or 6 months so it has no new relevance (at least to me). It's a layer of the onion that was peeled back before training camp and we know so little about it that I'm not sure it reveals much.

Anyway, I like Zimmer and he's done a great job of putting this team in position to win the division and make the playoffs. However, at this point, I don't view him as a coach who's made ALL the right moves and when it comes to the offensive side of the ball, he hasn't earned my unequivocal trust in his judgment. He and Norv may very well have a great reason for keeping Patterson on the bench. I just wish we knew what it is because from where I'm sitting, it still feels like a potential mistake.

It sounds like you are assuming accountability only relates to what players are doing on the field, and ignoring the film room, the meeting room, the practice field, the off-season, etc.

I'm not assuming that. I just used a couple of on-field examples to illustrate my point. As you pointed out below, we don't have much else to go on...

Someone posted an article in another thread about Zimmer's meetings and how they require real focus across the board. It may well be that players who can't meet the standard there are not going to be put in position to make those kind of mental mistakes on gameday. Perhaps they would mostly be given snaps where they will be used as a blocker, or taking handoffs.

Perhaps but we're in the realm of pure speculation now.

I'm not suggesting this IS so, but it could be. My point is we don't know 85 percent of what goes on in the organization.

That's true... which is why we have to speculate and wonder what the heck is going on.

[fiestavike]

That's true... which is why we have to speculate and wonder what the heck is going on.

All good and fair points above. On this last point, I'm fine with wondering, but when people start getting frustrated with and blaming the coaching staff I find it a bit irritating.

To me the preponderance of evidence suggests a certain belief to be more reasonable, but even there I am happy to admit that I lack enough evidence to be certain.

I think the whole debate/discussion would go much more smoothly if we all acknowledge that ALL WE ARE DOING is speculating.

[Mothman]

One of the reasons the way Patterson's been handled frustrates me so much can be encapsulated in this stat: during the final four games of 2014, he scored 3 receiving TDs (and 2 rushing TDs). This season, Vikings wide receivers have scored a total of 3 TDs in eleven games.

[fiestavike]

One of the reasons the way Patterson's been handled frustrates me so much can be encapsulated in this stat: during the final four games of 2014, he scored 3 receiving TDs (and 2 rushing TDs). This season, Vikings wide receivers have scored a total of 3 TDs in eleven games.

I think you'd have a hard time finding anyone who follows football that wouldn't give him credit for being dynamic and explosive. Its what makes things all the more frustrating.

Even more frustrating is that I really wanted Deandre Hopkins that year, who went just two picks earlier.

[Mothman]

All good and fair points above. On this last point, I'm fine with wondering, but when people start getting frustrated with and blaming the coaching staff I find it a bit irritating

I understand that but I think there's a world of difference between questioning them and blaming them.

I think the whole debate/discussion would go much more smoothly if we all acknowledge that ALL WE ARE DOING is speculating.

I agree. As I said, I'd just like to know what's going on and in the absence of any explanation, I'm not willing to just assume the coaches are making a wise choice. To me, the preponderance of evidence suggests they are stubbornly allowing a potentially valuable asset to languish on the bench... but I'll happily admit we don't have much evidence.

[fiestavike]

I understand that but I think there's a world of difference between questioning them and blaming them.
I agree. As I said, I'd just like to know what's going on and in the absence of any explanation, I'm not willing to just assume the coaches are making a wise choice. To me, the preponderance of evidence suggests they are stubbornly allowing a potentially valuable asset to languish on the bench... but I'll happily admit we don't have much evidence.

but I think you will agree that you could imagine a situation in which using that valuable asset could reduce the credibility of the coaching staff, and diminish the respect for whatever standards they are trying to hold each member of the team up to.

This is true even if we could all assume and agree that said asset would be a clear upgrade. this goes back to learning how to win, in my opinion...Talented teams that lack accountability aren't going to succeed. I think this franchise is proof of that.

[dead_poet]

I understand that but I think there's a world of difference between questioning them and blaming them.
I agree. As I said, I'd just like to know what's going on and in the absence of any explanation, I'm not willing to just assume the coaches are making a wise choice. To me, the preponderance of evidence suggests they are stubbornly allowing a potentially valuable asset to languish on the bench... but I'll happily admit we don't have much evidence.

Quick question: If the coaching staff set up for Teddy to work with Joe Montana (or another HoF QB) last offseason and Teddy declined I assume it'd still be a footnote and much ado about nothing?

[Mothman]

but I think you will agree that you could imagine a situation in which using that valuable asset could reduce the credibility of the coaching staff, and diminish the respect for whatever standards they are trying to hold each member of the team up to.

Sure, I can imagine it but it's just more speculation.

[fiestavike]

Sure, I can imagine it but it's just more speculation.

Of course it is. We already agreed that's basically all we have to go on. Can you speculate some other reasons why Patterson might not be getting many reps?

[dead_poet]

Of course it is. We already agreed that's basically all we have to go on. Can you speculate some other reasons why Patterson might not be getting many reps?

I assume they feel he has better speed/is a better fit as Turner's vertical threat and is a more capable receiver that can run a full route tree. Perhaps he's also better at escaping press coverage, something Patterson has struggled with.