Vikings Waive Ben Tate

[Pondering Her Percy]

The coaching staff didn't make Freeman play so poorly that he's no longer in the league. He played himself out of Tampa Bay and it appears he's now played himself out of the NFL (although maybe he'll get another shot somewhere next offseason). That's on him.

As to your other point, I agree that it makes sense for a GM to "kick the tires" on veteran players they think might be able to help their team. I'm not sure what to make of a comment like "Not as bad as the Josh Freeman pickup I guess" because it implies some expectation of success from the Vikings point of view when it may be that all they wanted to do, with both Freeman and Tate, was take a closer look.

I never once said the reason he played bad was because of the coaching staff. What I was implying was that the coaching staff rushed him into the starting lineup way too quick. The guy barely knew the playbook and we had him playing. Playing him later in the season still might not have made a difference but to rush him into the lineup that quick was ridiculous

[Purple bruise]

SMH. Barely even tried to run the ball him. But hey, trotting out Matt for his usual 3 yards a carry sure seemed to have us winning games.

I cannot wait until Peterson and/or (just) McKinnon is back.

I just do not understand several fan's disdain for Asiata. No one on this team seems to try as hard as this guy and he is nearly unstoppable in short yardage situations. I happen to feel that he brings a valued asset to this team and apparently so does the team and coaches. Yeah he is no AD but that is not the type of back that he is. When Mckinnon returns healthy, he and Asiata provide a very good 1-2 punch. In 192 carries he has averaged 31/2 yds. per carry and scored 12 TDs, plus has made lots of short third down plays.
As far as Tate goes, he was a quick stop gap measure when the injuries mounted up in the backfield. I do believe that the GM and coaches know a 100000000Xs more than us armchair GMs about this and every other situation team related.
It is fun to speculate (that is what we do on a message board) but I do trust in what the coaches and GM see everyday in practice and there is a whole lot IMO that goes into these decisions. We can sit back and 20/20 hindsight second guess ourselves to death with lots of issues but I for one trust in their decisions.

[Mothman]

I was wondering why they go through the trouble of signing some guy, then never giving him a chance, and picking up some undersized back (which we already have 2 of, Mckinnon, Banyard). Myabe not undersized, just small.

Signing him IS giving him a chance. They bring in a player like Tate, teach him his assignments, watch him in practice, give him a little game time to see how he performs... evidently, Tate didn't impress them. They go to the trouble of signing a player like that to see if he can impress them but playing time for a player like that is usually earned in practice. Maybe Tate simply didn't earn much of it.

[Purple bruise]

Signing him IS giving him a chance. They bring in a player like Tate, teach him his assignments, watch him in practice, give him a little game time to see how he performs... evidently, Tate didn't impress them. They go to the trouble of signing a player like that to see if he can impress them but playing time for a player like that is usually earned in practice. Maybe Tate simply didn't earn much of it.

Sort of like wr. Charles Johnson. How is that working out

[Mothman]

Sort of like wr. Charles Johnson. How is that working out

Good point. Johnson is basically the flip side of the coin, a player who was brought in during the season who has earned more time and clearly impressed the coaches.

[Demi]

Maybe Tate would have "earned" it if he was given the number or reps Johnson was. Johnson was given much more of a chance, probably because of how poorly Patterson was doing. And how much Norv likes blocky non-explosive running backs.

[MNSportsNut]

You also have to remember that Norv has some prior experience with Johnson so he kind of knew what he was getting.

The guy that I am really curious about is Henry Josey. He sounds like he could be a good back if he can stay healthy. Just not much experience there. Is he a replacement/improvement over Tate?

[DK Sweets]

I've already said this, but very few things would make me happier than to see Josey succeed.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Maybe Tate would have "earned" it if he was given the number or reps Johnson was. Johnson was given much more of a chance, probably because of how poorly Patterson was doing. And how much Norv likes blocky non-explosive running backs.

How much Norv likes "blocky" RBs? He has never really had one outside of Asiata so that doesn't really make sense.

However in regards to Asiata, great short yardage back but just brutal as a lead back. He couldn't make a guy miss if his life depended on it. Granted I like McKinnon but this is why I think RB is a much bigger need than people think. Especially with Gordon and Gurley coming out (2 of the best to come out in years). We can't go into next year "hoping" when it comes to a running game. We need a guy that can carry the rock and take the load off Teddy a bit. If we have a chance to take Gordon or Gurley at the right time....it's an absolute no brainer

[PurpleKoolaid]

We need a running game. That's doesn't mean a high pick. We did that once, didn't get us anywhere we haven't been before. Mckinnon, Cobb, Asiata should work. Felton will be gone so Rhett will prolly change to FB.

[Mothman]

We need a running game. That's doesn't mean a high pick. We did that once, didn't get us anywhere we haven't been before.

If that's the thinking, then they shouldn't draft any other position they've ever drafted with a high pick either.

You're implying causality between selecting Peterson with a high pick and not winning a Super Bowl. Peterson isn't the reason the Vikes haven't won a Super Bowl. Failure to build a good enough team that included Peterson has been the problem.

[Pondering Her Percy]

We need a running game. That's doesn't mean a high pick. We did that once, didn't get us anywhere we haven't been before. Mckinnon, Cobb, Asiata should work. Felton will be gone so Rhett will prolly change to FB.

Yeah that doesn't make much sense. Your keyword there is "should". The reason we didn't get anywhere with AP was because of our lack of QB play. We bring in Favre and go to the NFC championship. We have our QB now. But now we don't really have the RB. So I think taking a RB with an early pick (not our first one) is very possible