I'm really hoping this article proves correct. That means Cook has to get his act together off the field and improve on the field as well. He definitely showed promise as an athlete.

Besides, the Vikings need all the help they can get in their D secondary.

That analysis was in line with what I was thinking. He was really starting to show major glimpses but then he had that incident with his woman.

He showed signs of being something you don't seem to see too much of anymore and that's a top tier "big" CB. It seems the league has shifted to short and speedy over the past decade, but with so many big, strong receivers like Calvin Johnson, Brandon Marshall, Fitzgerald, etc. I think a tall CB will be uniquely valuable. He showed signs that he might be able to limit CJ to just a few big passes per game (similar to how the best you could do to Randy was limit him to 1 TD.) Hopefully the events of last season and the offseason, as well as the Vikings confidence in him will motivate him to stay clear of legal troubles and prepare even harder on the field, so he can truly be a breakout superstar in 2012!

Not to rain on the parade, but according to the article Cook has spent almost as much time off the field as on it due to either injuries or legal trouble, struggled during much of that time when he was on the field, but he had one notable game against Megatron and now he's on track to be the Vikings breakout player?

I could be wrong, but I can think of several guys I'd put ahead of Cook on the list of players who might make major leaps this year (Rudolph and Harvin come to mind on offense and maybe even Ponder, while Griffin and Erin Henderson come to mind on the defensive side of the ball). Granted, the bar has been set pretty low for Cook and the other defensive backs due to the debacle put on by last year's defense, so it's entirely possible that Cook's return will appear very impressive. He certainly has the size and speed to be a major factor and I hope he does rise up to grab what appears to be a sweet opportunity to make a more positive name for himself, but the track record so far is very underwhelming. One thing is for sure - with the QB's and receivers in the NFC North, Cook and the rest of the Vikings db's are going to get a lot of opportunities to make highlight reel plays all season.

Why not? He was healthy last year while he was active, so it's not hard to believe that his knee problems are behind him. He played well in pretty much all of the games he played.



Note that PFF did a 'secret superstar' article on every NFL team, which means that they _had_ to find someone from the Vikings to write about. What really sets the bar low was a 3-13 team without a whole lot of young breakout talent waiting in the wings. Harvin is already a star, certainly no secret. Ponder showed nothing last year to suggest that he'll become a star, although in time it may happen. Possibly Rudolph, but without anyone throwing to him, he only showed flashes - maybe six really nice grabs during the entire season, and was not a difference maker. Griffen has a lot of potential and freakish athletic ability, but didn't do anything spectacular on the field last year. I think Erin Henderson is the only other real candidate (they also mention John Sullivan), but Erin is not and never will be a star in the NFL.

shoot I would be happy for pretty good player when it comes to our secondary...

except for winfield they have been just horrible for a number of years

From the article:



I read that as basically he was a bit player his rookie season and didn't make it through that due to injuries, then last year he was healthy for all of what, 2 games, only 1 of which was notable.

The article gave me the sense that Cook has unrealized potential mostly based on his performance in that game against the Lions. Other than that, he's had more notable incidents off the field since joining the Vikings than on it.

Could he still be the breakout star the article predicts? Absolutely. He has the physical tools to do it and happens to play on a team in desperate need of starting DBs and in a division with a plethora of good QBs and receivers. So the stars are aligning for him if he can stay on the field.



Wasn't it you that was trying to claim in another thread that Harvin wasn't all that great? I'm pretty sure it was. I can go look for it if you disagree. I find that position a little inconsistent with what you're saying here, but maybe you reconsidered it.

He's very good as a slot receiver and as a kick returner. One of the best in the game today at either position, even though the Vikings appear to not want him returning kicks any more. And with the new kickoff rules and so many automatic touchbacks, KO returners have largely been eliminated from the game.

My argument is that everyone thinks that all the Vikings need to do is get Harvin the ball more, in whatever way that might be, and he's just going to tear it up. He's not a great target as a wide out. He's OK, but he's nothing special because of his size. He's not a great running back. His average YPC is very good, but that's only because he's used mostly as a surprise addition to the backfield. If he were carrying the ball 20 times a game and teams were keying on him, his average would be well below Peterson's. The Vikings have (or should have) much better offensive strategies than leaning on Percy Harvin. Let him do what he does best. If that meant he only touches the ball six or eight times per game, so be it.

I respect your opinion but I'm glad you're not calling the shots for the Vikings. Harvin may not have the perfect build for an WR, but he's explosive and getting the ball in his hands should definitely be a priority on offense. Of course I'm not saying it should be at the expense of the team but that guy makes plays. It's even more silly to think about getting Harvin less touches when you consider the other options that would be getting touches instead.

Then target him more out of the slot instead of trying to run what amount to gadget plays.

And it doesn't matter who is running the Vikings offense, there is only so much you can do with the guy that makes sense. Which is probably why the Vikings haven't been able to use him as much as fans think they somehow should.

I guess I don't understand the logic. Those "gadget" plays actually tend to provide positive yardage (which is why his yards per carry is so good even though they might not be if he was an RB instead). I don't think they should necessarily try to use him more than they are ... but it seemed like you were advocating cutting down on the number of touches he gets which only makes sense to me if you've got someone that you think should get them instead. Hopefully someone will emerge to take some of the load off of him and Peterson ... but until then, they need the ball in Harvins hands I think.

The Vikings already use Harvin as a receiver, running back, and returner. About the only other positions left are punter, quarterback, and the offensive line.

So, I pretty much agree with you. I don't want Harvin throwing, punting, or on the line blocking.

For some reason they've been using him less on kick returns though. I know there is risk of injury, but it isn't like playing the slot is like walkig through feathers and flowers.

I know what you mean. Harvin isn't the biggest guy around so I guess the Vikings don't want to expose him to unnecessary punishment. That said, Harvin is deadly effective in the open field and he probably sees that situation more as a returner than anything else.

I hate to keep going around on this, but I still don't understand where you're coming from.

Let's compare Harvin to one of the best running backs in the game today - Chris Johnson. Per both player profiles, both Harvin and Johnson are 5'11". Harvin's official weight is 184#, while Johnson clocks in at 190#. Johnson has been in the league for 5 seasons as purely a running back. His stats over that time are (see http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/11258/chris-johnson):

1187 attempts for 5,645 yards (4.8 YPC) and 38 scores as a rusher, tacking on another 194 receptions for 1,426 yards (7.4 YPC) and 4 TDs as a receiver.

Now compare those stats to Percy Harvin's production over his 4 year career (see http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/12569/percy-harvin):

85 attempts for 587 yards (6.9 YPC) and 3 scores as a rusher, with 218 receptions for 2,625 yards (12.0 YPC) and 17 TDs.

To put the receiving numbers in perspective, let's compare Harvin's stats in that category to the relatively diminutive 9-year vet Wes Welker who tops out at 5'9" and 185# (see http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/5941/wes-welker). To keep things consistent I'll list Welker's rushing stats first:

17 attempts for 131 yards (7.7 YPC) and 0 TDs as a rusher, with 650 receptions for 7,226 yards (11.1 YPC) and 32 scores.

Size-wise, Harvin fits in nicely compared to both of these full-time players who get far more than the 6-8 touches per game you seem to think is ideal for Harvin based on his size. So that's puzzling to me, especially when from what I can see Harvin physically out-classes both Johnson and Welker considerably in terms of raw strength. When is the last time you saw Chris Johnson take a straight-on shot from a LB and the LB ended up on the ground while Johnson kept going (remember that game against the Lions in 2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRcjkM2Sf0E @2:20)?

And as to the point that Harvin isn't particularly great as either a runner or receiver, the comparison stats don't support that position, either. Sure, Harvin hasn't carried the ball nearly as much as Johnson, but in terms of yards per carry, Harvin compares well. Keep in mind that on many of Harvin's runs he is lined up as a RB in the backfield, so it's not like you can claim that his numbers are bolstered by the fact that the defense is getting caught off-guard by trick plays.

Johnson's TD's/carry ratio is 0.032, while Harvin's is 0.035, so even this measure of an RB's effectiveness in scoring each time he carries the ball, Harvin compares favorably to the heralded Johnson.

Welker's TD's/reception ratio is 0.049, while Harvin's is an eye-popping 0.078 (by comparison, Johnson's is 0.02).

So Eli, I once again have to ask whether you really consider Harvin a "star" in the classic sense of that word and a player that Musgrave and Frazier simply have to get on the field more and get more touches to realize his potential, or whether you see him as a bit player, albeit one who is capable of making big plays? IMHO a star is a guy like Welker, Johnson, AD, Megatron, etc. Stars are guys who an offense is run through and designed around. I find it perplexing, to say the least, that on a team like the Vikings that have guys like Harvin and AD, both are sitting on the sidelines at critical junctures of games and plays. That's equivalent to the Lions sitting Megatron or the Titans sitting Johnson when they need yards. That just doesn't make sense to me.

Harvin is a star player who should be on the field for as many touches as he can get IMHO. The more the better. It's not "all the Vikings need to do" by any stretch, but it's one of them if Frazier and Musgrave want to have success and be taken seriously by both Vikings fans and other teams.

Ironically, I listed him as one of my choices for "secret superstar" exactly because I don't think you're the only Vikings fan, much less the only NFL fan, who believes Harvin is a bit player, albeit an effective one. Bit players are not stars. If Harvin is going to get his due as a star, he's going to need to be seen as an every-down player and one that defenses must gameplan to stop.

Um, it's three years.

I'd say 218 receptions for 2,625 yards in 3 years is pretty good ... about 73 receptions and 875 yards per season.

You're right. I was just going off the stats pages I referenced, but all of them have played a year less than is shown on those pages.

Still doesn't change the thrust of the argument.

Let me see if I understand the thrust of your argument.

It sounds like you believe Harvin should be a bigger part of the offense ... and if he were, HE would be the secret superstar.

Is that correct?

If so, I agree completely.

I guess my point is that he's pretty good right now.

The thrust of my argument is in response to Eli's comment's that Harvin is "already a star" but then again, apparently he's not since he's a bit player who is too small and not particularly good at any one aspect of the game to warrant more than 6-8 touches per game.

By comparing Harvin both physically and in terms of performance to 2 acknowledged stars who excel at their respective positions I wanted to show that Harvin stacks up favorably.

On the bottom line yes, the basic argument is that Harvin needs to be an integral part of the offense who is on the field in critical situations and who sees a lot more than 6-8 touches per game.

Because Welker is a better wide receiver, and Johnson is a better running back.

Harvin is both and neither.

Which is why they use him differently. He struggled when they just threw him out wide and tried to use him like that. And he's had consistency issues all along. That LB might go down from Harvin, but Johnson has started every single game for the last three years. Harvin gets dinged up on a week to week basis. And gets a significantly smaller number of hits. Same goes for Welker who gets beat up on those inside routes and still shows up and plays every week without rib/shoulder/head issues.

If he's going to be seen as a star, his durability is going to have to improve. When people mentioned it before they were migraines and it wasn't an issue. Now it's beyond migraines. And he's coming off "minor" shoulder surgery. He's going to have to find a role somewhere, and stay healthy enough to contribute there. I'm sure it'd help him immensely if he had a coordinator who was willing to take advantage of what he brings that other players don't, but who knows if Musgrave is going to continue to do that. He did show it now and then last year but we'll have to see. Especially if Ponder struggles or Adrian has any issues with recovery.

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about. If even Vikings fans don't consider Harvin a superstar, he can't be viewed as a superstar by those who don't follow the team.

The durability thing is a load. I posted stats showing that Harvin has missed all of 3 regular season games in the 3 years he's played, and while he has gotten dinged up, he's still on the field compiling stats that don't exactly support your claim that Harvin is inferior to both Johnson as a runner and Welker as a receiver.

Anyway, until Harvin gets his due by Vikings fans themselves, IMHO he's easily the best-positioned of anyone on the team to emerge as the "secret superstar".

As far as the durability being "a load". Here's last year:
Week 3: Toe
Week 6: Ribs
Week 8: Ribs
Week 12: Ribs
Week 13: Illness
Week 14: Finger
And then the shoulder injury and surgery in the offseason

The guys hurt, all the time. Regardless of whether he's active and plays. There's a reason the coaches don't give him more snaps, because he hasn't shown he can handle it.

No one is saying he's not a damn good player. But if I need a running back, I'm taking Johnson, and if I need a wide receiver, I'm taking Welker. Maybe at some point, maybe even soon, he'll pass Welker, but to think a consistent 1000+ yard receiver or rusher isn't as good as a hybrid who hasn't shown he can consistently play either position? That might be going a bit far this early in his career...

Welker could not hold Harvin's jock. He has had Brady throwing to him as opposed to the QBs Harvin has played with.
The guy missed three games in three years. The injuries listed are a testiment to how tough he is.
Take Welker and put him on the Vikes the last three years and he would barely show up in the stats.

I'd take a gander at Welker's injury history/report too. He was listed a bunch last season (and previous seasons as well).



I disagree. He's shown he can handle it. Just look at his last half of the season when he was playing more snaps. He responded by having one of (if not the greatest) final halves of the season of any receiver in the league.

But he still played through the injuries, and the fact remains he's missed 3 games in 3 seasons. That's a lot less than the predicted secret superstar Chris Cook.



I'm saying his stats compare favorably to those players, both in terms of his physical stature and in terms of his relative production. I'm not suggesting Harvin is better than either player or even that he would be better if he were full-time at either position.

I think this whole debate highlights that Harvin is the best Vikings candidate to a "secret" superstar. As I said earlier, if even Vikings fans don't agree that Harvin is a superstar, he can hardly already be considered a superstar by those who don't follow the team. If it's down to Harvin or Cook, I'd put my money on Harvin.

Out of curiosity, why would you take Johnson over Peterson?

Compared to Harvin.

And Harvin plays through the injuries all the time, regardless if he's hurting or not. He deserves credit for that.



I've seen Harvin standing on the sidelines when he should be in the game, even when he's been healthy. There's a reason for that and it has nothing to do with Harvin not showing he can handle playing football. But I do agree it has something to do with the coaching and I don't think that's all Harvin's fault.



And if I need someone who can play both WR and RB, plus return kicks, and be extremely effective at all of it, I'll take Harvin. That's not a knock on Johnson or Welker, who are two of the best in the league at what they do. It's just that Harvin is good enough that he deserves to be discussed in a conversation with the likes of Chris Johnson and Wes Welker.

Oh, I see. That makes sense then.