Some good news . . .

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Some good news . . .

    While we're all getting depressed about how BB's latest crop of bargain basement draft choices will turn out--on IR, in jail, cut--I thought it might cheer everyone up to read about how one of those picks BB traded away to the Vikings is doing in camp . . .
     
     
    At one point or another in recent weeks, I've had a half-dozen people tell me how impressive rookie receiver Cordarrelle Patterson has been during offseason workouts. To my untrained eye, of course, Patterson looks like a fast and energetic young receiver who can get downfield without a problem against defenders who aren't wearing pads and can't hold or hit him. So I appreciated the way Jennings, speaking to reporters on the second day of mandatory minicamp, described a subtle but important skill Patterson has demonstrated. 

    [+] EnlargeMinnesota's Cordarrelle Patterson
    Bruce Kluckhohn/USA TODAY SportsMinnesota's Cordarrelle Patterson has impressed Greg Jennings during offseason workouts.
    Jennings referred to it as "that definitive step," a decisive and aggressive move at the top of routes that Jennings considers the key to creating separation. It runs counter to the football ideal of making every route look the same for as long as possible, but for Jennings it is a reminder of what made him successful in his early years with the Packers and something he has encouraged Patterson to retain. 

    "I remember coming out [of college]," Jennings said, "I had that definitive step. That kind of gets washed out because everything they teach you is that they want everything to look the same. The definitive step starts to kind of fade away, but that's what creates that separation. I just told him, do not lose that. Because the more I see him do that, the more I remember when I used to do that and create so much, even more separation. I'm starting to creep that back in." 

    I understand why coaches would want efficiency and continuity of movement from receivers and all other positions as well. But as Jennings reflects over his career, he has come to consider it in a different light. The Vikings have asked him to serve as Patterson's mentor on and off the field, and that's what Jennings has chosen to emphasize. 

    "Sometimes what makes a player what he is, is the thing we try to take away," Jennings said. "It comes natural. That's a gift. You can't really teach that. He has it. And I remember, that was me. I was coming out and sticking everything. And the coaches were like, 'We just want to round it, we just want to round it.' Slowly but surely, I started rounding everything. The route still looks good, but it just doesn't have that crispness about it." 

    Jennings also spoke about the more obvious parts of Patterson's game, most notably his top gear. "If you see the back of his jersey," Jennings said, "you might a well stop running, because it's over." 

    But if you want to know what has the football professionals so impressed with him, Jennings' explanation is as good as any. He's got an "it' that not everyone has, one that Jennings has advised him to ride rather than hide.
     
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Eldunker. Show Eldunker's posts

    Re: Some good news . . .

    In response to NedBraden's comment:

     

    How is some self induced hype by a Vikings teammate on a rookie "good news" on a Pats board?

     



    You seem to be critical of everyone and every post.  What are you a New York angry arrogant Jets troll?

     

    If you don't like a topic move on.  Its not for you to be judge and jury of posts on here.  Especially since you haven't contributed a single thing of value.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Eldunker. Show Eldunker's posts

    Re: Some good news . . .

    Keep up that posting count.  Its all about Quantity not Quality for trolls.  and even if your mommy and daddy didn't like you, which is the case for most arrogant obnoxious trolls like you, we might let you stay for a while.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Some good news . . .

    Prolate,

    What's your analysis on the article? Should the pats have drafted Patterson last year at the bottom of round 1 instead of Dobson and Boyce? 

    Meanwhile, Dobson is signed but per reiss hasn't clicked yet and Boyce has yet to practice given a bad foot. 

    if any of the article is true and Patterson has a good year, this will turn into another trade away talent for value discussion. Certainly worth keeping an eye on as the season progresses .

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Some good news . . .

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

     

    Prolate,

    What's your analysis on the article? Should the pats have drafted Patterson last year at the bottom of round 1 instead of Dobson and Boyce? 

    Meanwhile, Dobson is signed but per reiss hasn't clicked yet and Boyce has yet to practice given a bad foot. 

    if any of the article is true and Patterson has a good year, this will turn into another trade away talent for value discussion. Certainly worth keeping an eye on as the season progresses .

     



    It's way too early to tell, but if the Patterson trade turns out like the Matthews trade, while Gronk and Hern are sidelined for the very reasons they fell in the draft (injury and character concerns) Rusty is going to look a tad foolish having called half the board trolls or morons for simply questioning whether the Pats' value strategy has really been more effective than the strategies of teams like the Ravens and Packers.

     Rusty was gloating about the Pats having " fleeced" the Vikings.  But right now all of Belichick's "fleecing" and "waiting in the weeds" is looking a bit less like genius than it did a week ago.

     

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Some good news . . .

     

    It's way too early to tell Rusty whether the guy "the greatest GM of all time" could have picked but didn't (Patterson) will turn out to be as awful as the one he actually did pick (Jackson).

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Some good news . . .


    I didn't think there was any way Cordarrelle Patterson was going to last past pick 15, there were rumors he was immature, that the receivers at Tenn were so talented that it helped him, that he was raw, etc...but I saw him in interviews and I thought he handled himself very well. I didn't think this kid showed any of that thug personality and he looked like the most explosive player (at that size) in the draft. Honestly he looked like one of the few special players in the draft - when we didn't select him I thought...well we must know something about his past/personality that everyone at home doesn't realize. Seems pretty stupid now to think that we know something that others don't - we just gave 40 million to a guy that very well may be a psycho - and Belichick and the other coaches got to spend 8 hours a day with the kid...travel with him...talk to him...eat with him...

    Something is going wrong in our player acquisition department.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Some good news . . .

    In response to NedBraden's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

     

    Prolate,

    What's your analysis on the article? Should the pats have drafted Patterson last year at the bottom of round 1 instead of Dobson and Boyce? 

    Meanwhile, Dobson is signed but per reiss hasn't clicked yet and Boyce has yet to practice given a bad foot. 

    if any of the article is true and Patterson has a good year, this will turn into another trade away talent for value discussion. Certainly worth keeping an eye on as the season progresses .

     



    It's way too early to tell, but if the Patterson trade turns out like the Matthews trade, while Gronk and Hern are sidelined for the very reasons they fell in the draft (injury and character concerns) Rusty is going to look a tad foolish having called half the board trolls or morons for simply questioning whether the Pats' value strategy has really been more effective than the strategies of teams like the Ravens and Packers.

     Rusty was gloating about the Pats having " fleeced" the Vikings.  But right now all of Belichick's "fleecing" and "waiting in the weeds" is looking a bit less like genius than it did a week ago.

     

     



    As for your continued dumb Clay Matthews armchair QB comments.

     

    NEWSFLASH:

    BB will NEVER, ever ,ever take a front 7 player who isn;t interested in tackling or playing the run for his defense in the 1st rd. Ever.

    Forget it. Matthews is a very good pass rusher who can get into the backfield to blow some plays up, but BB wants guys who do more than 1 thing for a front 7 player in the 1st rd. If you look at all his players taken in Rd 1 on defense, they all do many things well.  

    Seymour, Warren, Wilfork, Mayo, McCourty.

    The entire GB D has sucked two years in a row in areas of tackling and run D. Matthews is a big part of that.

    [/QUOTE]

    Darius Butler was definitely a better contributor to our D than that bum Clay Matthews would have ever been.  Bwaaaaaahaaaaaaahaaaaaa

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Some good news . . .

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    It's way too early to tell Rusty whether the guy "the greatest GM of all time" could have picked but didn't (Patterson) will turn out to be as awful as the one he actually did pick (Jackson).



    So they why did you post this article?  Do you really need to start another flame war with Rusty?  I'm sure I could dig up articles of someone praising Chad Jackson with the pads off.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Some good news . . .

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    It's way too early to tell Rusty whether the guy "the greatest GM of all time" could have picked but didn't (Patterson) will turn out to be as awful as the one he actually did pick (Jackson).

     



    So they why did you post this article?  Do you really need to start another flame war with Rusty?  I'm sure I could dig up articles of someone praising Chad Jackson with the pads off.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yep, there was nothing I wanted to watch on TV . . .

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Some good news . . .

    The only good news this week, and I preface this by saying I have been camped out doing NOTHING at TD Garden for going on 3 day straight playing with my iPad, is that Gronk surgery apparently went very well, and theoretically he could be back to open he season. 

    I think I now may be more concerned about the wrist than the back, until I see for myself he is again 100%

    What a crazy couple of months here in Btown. The Marathon, the RS, the Bruins, Doc/Garnett, Pats preseason/ draft and now the Hern situation. 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Some good news . . .

    Pro, I know Rusty gets under all our skins and we'd like to rub it in every so often but take the high road on this one. Just put him on ignore. It's what I did and know I can actually have football conversations with people who want to have discussions, without all back and forth "I must be right" nonsense
    I swear by lil 10 pound bearded baby Jesus

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Some good news . . .

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    Pro, I know Rusty gets under all our skins and we'd like to rub it in every so often but take the high road on this one. Just put him on ignore. It's what I did and know I can actually have football conversations with people who want to have discussions, without all back and forth "I must be right" nonsense
    I swear by lil 10 pound bearded baby Jesus

     



    Oh, I know . . . it's just that he's been all over me this week for saying in the past that some other GMs like Newsome and Thompson are probably comparable to BB.  I've continually maintained that BB is a very good GM, but his value approach requires trade offs.  While it protects against cap problems and preserves a lot of flexibility for the team to make moves because of the freedom from cap problems, it also can result in fewer players with top talent.  The 2010 draft has been the thing we all (including me) have pointed to as an example of when the trade offs work in BB's favour.  However, recent events (Gronk's surgeries and now this Hernandez mess) seem to suggest that the 2010 draft wasn't as successful as it seemed.  Sure, the talent was there cheap for BB, but the concerns that led other GM's to pass on Gronk and Hern now seem more serious than even I had thought.  The ankle and wrist injuries for Gronk may have been bad luck, but the back injury (what he had when he was drafted) makes me wonder if the guy is really going to be able to hold up for very long.  And then there's this whole Hern mess, which suggests the character issues were deeper than we knew (yet is seems other GMs knew).  

     

    When you add on the all the other guys we've traded down for who haven't had the talent of Gronk and Hern (and ended up being cut) or who never got over injuries, you kind of start to wonder if BB is really getting the value for all this trading down.  That does hurt BB's standing as "best GM" and makes guys like Newsome and Thompson look like even tougher contenders for best current GM . . . 

    The Patterson deal is one to watch.  Hopefully it works out, but there's always been a nagging concern that a few years down the road it may feel a lot like the Matthews deal.  In that one, they passed on a guy who turned out to be a top pass rusher (and a decent run defender despite what Rusty says)--something they really need--for two guys that really didn't contribute much, plus some picks that helped them get Edelman (in the seventh round) and eventually Gronk.  This year, they gave up the Patterson pick (a position they desparately need) to have more picks further down in the draft.  I'm optimistic about Dobson and Boyce, but if Patterson turns out to be the real deal and Dobson and Boyce go the way of Price and Jackson (while Gronk heads to IR and Hern to jail), the value strategy is going to look a lot less successful than it may have looked before this offseason.  If all that were to happen (and it may not happen), I think BB's GM approach would really have to be called into question. Jury's still out, but I know I'll be watching, not because I want to see Belichick fail (quite the opposite) or win any arguments with Rusty, but because I really want to understand what does work and doesn't. 

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Some good news . . .

    I completely understand. You know how I feel about the "value" picks and "value" signings. They have there place but you also need to upfront talent to take those chances, which more than often don't pan out. Rusty has called me a whole host of things in the past for these feelings, esp when I questioned if this past move back was a good deal for the Pats. I was also a big advocate of getting Matthews back in the day and still think we got the short of the stick on that one. To me there are times to trade back and times to move up. When you need higher talent and have a solid team you move up and spend in FA to fill a couple of critical areas. If you are in complete rebuild and need to completely remake a portion of the team then by all means take the shotgun approach. But, what frustrates me is that they prepared and called this offseason perfectly (contracts and all) and instead of taking advantage of it they used it as another means to get even more value. Like I said, I let Rusty get under my skin too much this offseason and have him on ignore for good reason. The place seems so much better without the consistant back and forth and enormous posts


    I swear by lil 10 pound bearded baby Jesus

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: Some good news . . .

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    It's way too early to tell Rusty whether the guy "the greatest GM of all time" could have picked but didn't (Patterson) will turn out to be as awful as the one he actually did pick (Jackson).

     



    So they why did you post this article?  Do you really need to start another flame war with Rusty?  I'm sure I could dig up articles of someone praising Chad Jackson with the pads off.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    "The Boston Herald reports that rookie WR Chad Jackson looked really strong in his first minicamp with the Patriots, showing his speed, good hands and crisp route running. "(I'm trying to) take my name off the list of University of Florida receivers who didn't succeed in the NFL," said Jackson prior to the workout. "I want to take my name out of that category." 

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share