So choose another example. Nelson was just a convenient choice made for what should be obvious reasons and FAR from the main point.Demi wrote: 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.
Oh, and please, by all means, remind us another 150 times that Johnson was a former practice squad player (as if they never, ever amount to anything) and you really can't use the phrase "mystical WR guru" enough either.