Vikings Message Board.Com

I have no disdain for Patterson. I was one of the only ones who wanted the kid and was ecstatic when they got him.

My concerns lie with the issues we've been told he has and with how things like this aren't fixed by the weight room. I agree, "no duh," but my post was more in response to the giddiness I feel fans start to generate just because they see a player on their team is a workout warrior and running up mountains or something. You always here "___ is in the best shape of their life" and then they get out on the field and they're still clueless and still unproductive. I'm more tempered when I hear that stuff because it's just a normal expectation any pro athlete should have, in my opinion. The true greats get it done in the film room and working on a craft, not their straight line speed time and squat #'s. Those are just prerequisites.

Having said that...Yeah, if he's doing all those things and knowing what he's looking at and putting in that work then heck yeah!...But I won't get excited because he's working out with devil guy or whoever.

I used an example to help with my point, but I guess it was just fodder or I probably didn't clearly articulate what I meant. But what has working hard in the offseason done for Kaepernick in terms of what happens on the football field?...Nothing. He looks good physically. His play regressed though and he still can't read a defense. Was he working as hard in the film room as he proclaimed to be inside the weight room? I don't know. But if he was -- back to another point I brought up -- some people just can't figure it out and aren't wired that way. That's why I don't care a whole lot about this particular subject.

PacificNorseWest wrote:Having said that...Yeah, if he's doing all those things and knowing what he's looking at and putting in that work then heck yeah!...But I won't get excited because he's working out with devil guy or whoever.

I used an example to help with my point, but I guess it was just fodder or I probably didn't clearly articulate what I meant. But what has working hard in the offseason done for Kaepernick in terms of what happens on the football field?...Nothing. He looks good physically. His play regressed though and he still can't read a defense. Was he working as hard in the film room as he proclaimed to be inside the weight room? I don't know. But if he was -- back to another point I brought up -- some people just can't figure it out and aren't wired that way. That's why I don't care a whole lot about this particular subject.

Where does the "if" come in with Patterson? "If" he's doing the bookwork? You're saying he's not really working out privately with someone on the fundamentals even though it's been repeatedly reported that he is? Even though both Zimmer and Turner have said it? That's the part I don't get.

You don't care about Patterson's physical workouts. Well, I don't care about what Kaepernick did or didn't do.

I never said he's not working out privately. What the hell are you guys reading?

And I haven't read anything about him putting in film work and whatnot, but not because that information isn't out there, just haven't been reading up on it. That's not what my main point was and what I don't understand is why it's so hard for people to grasp why I couldn't care any less about his offseason workouts and that my post was in response to the hoopla that comes from fans that usually generates from this type stuff. I just don't care nor share the same excitement with that stuff and I shared my opinion why. It was singular response to that ONE topic. Nothing more.

Your last sentence I"ll just ignore because it brings me back to 4th grade. Kaepernick was just an example beyond my logic. Mannnn...smh

I'm ready to let this one die now.

PacificNorseWest wrote:

I never said he's not working out privately. What the hell are you guys reading?

I think they're probably responding as they are (in part) because of this statement:

This isn't a Rocky movie. Just because you're doing a unique workout on a mountain or a beach, doesn't prepare you for a football game. CP better be working on his routes, memorizing the playbook and spending the rest of the day watching film harder than he is "getting into the best shape of his life." That won't help what he needs so desperately to improve on.

The implication is that he's working out with a trainer but not working on his routes, the playbook, etc. It doesn't sound like that's what you meant but I get the impression that's how it was interpreted and since Patterson has also been working with a former WR (presumably on improving WR-specific skills, like route running) this offseason, people are bristling at the implication that he's not working on "what he needs so desperately to improve on"

In a nutshell, it looks like a simple misunderstanding. You're talking about one thing and people are getting the impression you mean something else. It happens to me here from time to time and it can be frustrating for everyone involved.

You have a point that being in great physical shape is quite different from improving skills and knowledge but since all 3 seem important to success in the NFL, it sounds like Patterson is taking a smart approach to the offseason.

This Hell's Trainer stuff is reminding me of Ol' Stony Hands McGillicuddy, pardon me, Troy Williamson, working with Nike.

Dude got blown up in his own sport by Charles Johnson. He's a bust.

Hunter Morrow wrote:This Hell's Trainer stuff is reminding me of Ol' Stony Hands McGillicuddy, pardon me, Troy Williamson, working with Nike.

Dude got blown up in his own sport by Charles Johnson. He's a bust.

CP is a bust are you related to Northwest dude

Purple bruise wrote: CP is a bust are you related to Northwest dude

We traded up to get him and Charles Johnson outproduced him in 4 fewer games with about 20 fewer targets.
No offense to Charles Johnson, but come on.

Getting Mike Wallace and taking Stefon Diggs was as much a vote of no confidence in Cordarrelle Patterson as it was getting a good player, too.

Dude's got a bullseye painted on his back for a reason.

Hunter Morrow wrote: We traded up to get him and Charles Johnson outproduced him in 4 fewer games with about 20 fewer targets.
No offense to Charles Johnson, but come on.

Getting Mike Wallace and taking Stefon Diggs was as much a vote of no confidence in Cordarrelle Patterson as it was getting a good player, too.

Dude's got a bullseye painted on his back for a reason.

I strongly disagree and think CP will have a great year. To each their own and time will tell which ones of us are right

Purple bruise wrote: CP is a bust are you related to Northwest dude

Being completely understanding of the fact that some players can take 3 years or more to reach their true potential, and become the player they were drafted to be, I would say that, yes, there really isn't much thus far to indicate the flash isn't somewhat of a bust at this point.

Jordysghost wrote:Being completely understanding of the fact that some players can take 3 years or more to reach their true potential, and become the player they were drafted to be, I would say that, yes, there really isn't much thus far to indicate the flash isn't somewhat of a bust at this point.

How about 9 TDs in limited playing time as a rookie? That's not exactly what you one expects from a bust.

When people refer to Patterson as a bust at this point I think it reflects a fundamental lack of understanding about his situation coming into the league in the first place. As you said, some players can take 3 years or more to reach their full potential. Patterson was widely considered a raw prospect coming out of college. He was ranked and drafted high based on his instinctive playmaking ability, with the understanding that he would be a project with a steep learning curve. Now that exactly what most analysts expected at the time is playing out (and it was probably complicated by a switch in coaches and the need to learn a new system in year 2), everybody impatiently wants to write him off. It's way too soon to do that or to call him a bust.

Here's another way to look at it: Patterson had more yards and as many TDs last year as former second round pick Jordy Nelson had in his second season. We all know Nelson was no bust but it took him years to work his way into a starting position and become a highly productive receiver. In a few years, Patterson could be a star... or an actual bust. However, breaking out the big "B" word now is premature (I know you weren't the first one to do it but I;m addressing the notion here, not just your post).

Mothman wrote: How about 9 TDs in limited playing time as a rookie? That's not exactly what you one expects from a bust.

When people refer to Patterson as a bust at this point I think it reflects a fundamental lack of understanding about his situation coming into the league in the first place. As you said, some players can take 3 years or more to reach their full potential. Patterson was widely considered a raw prospect coming out of college. He was ranked and drafted high based on his instinctive playmaking ability, with the understanding that he would be a project with a steep learning curve. Now that exactly what most analysts expected at the time is playing out (and it was probably complicated by a switch in coaches and the need to learn a new system in year 2), everybody impatiently wants to write him off. It's way too soon to do that or to call him a bust.

Here's another way to look at it: Patterson had more yards and as many TDs last year as former second round pick Jordy Nelson had in his second season. We all know Nelson was no bust but it took him years to work his way into a starting position and become a highly productive receiver. In a few years, Patterson could be a star... or an actual bust. However, breaking out the big "B" word now is premature (I know you weren't the first one to do it but I;m addressing the notion here, not just your post).

Those Packer colors trying to show https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1hV3Ldg61g

His third year coming up and he must be a but

Here's another way to look at it: Patterson had more yards and as many TDs last year as former second round pick Jordy Nelson had in his second season. We all know Nelson was no bust but it took him years to work his way into a starting position and become a highly productive receiver. In a few years, Patterson could be a star... or an actual bust. However, breaking out the big "B" word now is premature (I know you weren't the first one to do it but I;m addressing the notion here, not just your post).

That was because of the Packers depth at WR, not because of Nelson. They had two productive veteran receivers, the Vikings had none last season. Patterson was given a starting job and still couldn't produce. Nelson also didn't lose his starting job to a practice squad player from another team. Nelson started as many games in his first three years as Patterson did in his first. You think if Nelson had started 13 games his first two seasons he wouldn't have had the numbers Patterson did? I don't remember ever hearing about mystical WR gurus and hell's trainers trying to teach Nelson how to play the game after his second season. I don't remember the "B" word ever being brought up about him. There's no comparison at all between the two, or their situations.

I think Patterson is moving into Ponder territory when people start bringing up Pro Bowlers to compare him to. Because "maybe". Find a receiver who was given a starting role after being drafted in the first round, struggled to play the position, was benched for a no one from another teams practice squad his second season, and didn't become a bust.

Mothman wrote: How about 9 TDs in limited playing time as a rookie? That's not exactly what you one expects from a bust.

When people refer to Patterson as a bust at this point I think it reflects a fundamental lack of understanding about his situation coming into the league in the first place. As you said, some players can take 3 years or more to reach their full potential. Patterson was widely considered a raw prospect coming out of college. He was ranked and drafted high based on his instinctive playmaking ability, with the understanding that he would be a project with a steep learning curve. Now that exactly what most analysts expected at the time is playing out (and it was probably complicated by a switch in coaches and the need to learn a new system in year 2), everybody impatiently wants to write him off. It's way too soon to do that or to call him a bust.

Here's another way to look at it: Patterson had more yards and as many TDs last year as former second round pick Jordy Nelson had in his second season. We all know Nelson was no bust but it took him years to work his way into a starting position and become a highly productive receiver. In a few years, Patterson could be a star... or an actual bust. However, breaking out the big "B" word now is premature (I know you weren't the first one to do it but I;m addressing the notion here, not just your post).

Nice post, and I agree on a couple points. And, just for the record, I wouldn't be surprised at all if CP was able to take his obvious raw ability and become good player, i guess, that isn't my expectation, but it wouldn't shock me by any means.

I guess I feel the way I do, because, and maybe I have gotten the wrong impression, idk, Im sure you guys watch more Vikes games then I do, but the guy just looks lost when I see him play, his route running is obviously not where it needs to be at this point, and he just has a certain way of making himself look not nearly as game breaking as he truly could/will be .

And, DAMN 9 TDs as a rookie? I was certainly not aware of that, thanks for sharing.

Purple bruise wrote: Those Packer colors trying to show https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1hV3Ldg61g

His third year coming up and he must be a but

Oh please, I never said he was for sure a bust, only that he has been somewhat of a bust to this point. Now, again, when I said that I wasn't quite recalling his 9 td rookie season, as Mothman so graciously pointed out.

But I do think when you trade up for a guy in the first, you would want him to be a little bit more consistent then flash has been to this point. He has raw ability that cant be taught so it will be interesting to see how his career goes from here.

He kind of reminds me of a guy on our roster, Casey Hayward. Had a baller rookie season and constantly flashes immense talent but hasn't been as consistent as you would hope.

Purple bruise wrote: CP is a bust are you related to Northwest dude

Now I said he's a bust? Seriously?!

I can't compete with ignorance.