Vikings Message Board.Com

Posted: **Sun Mar 03, 2013 5:57 pm**

Rus wrote: I've been saying this for awhile...Wheaton is the man at OSU. He seems to catch almost everything, come down with it, and go get some real YAC. He's a pretty good sleeper pick, and if the Vikes go WR in 2 and 3 (which I'm almost thinking is a possibility), he probably will be there in the third. The league doesn't seem to respect OSU's offensive players, yet they weren't a bad team at all last year. (I listened to the game where they beat Nichols State 77-3. I also heard the one where they beat the Golden Bears 62-14...the only team they lost "badly" to was the Ducks.) I tuned into a lot of their games this past season on the radio, and it's pretty clear Wheaton is not just a talented player, but he was a good guy in the locker room and a guy that most of the team respected. When he was interviewed (which was pretty often, they also had him doing advertisements for the games because he was basically the face of the whole team), he seemed to have a really solid understanding of the game.

My only concern about him is that he might not be able to rely on having prototypical size or speed...there are tall, rangy guys, there are short, quick guys, and then there are a lot of these guys that are somewhere in-between. Wheaton is in that last category. But some of the greatest receivers in the game were in that category as well.

If the Vikings risk the wrath of their hardcore fan base and forgo receivers in the first 2 rounds, they certainly wouldn't do wrong by picking Wheaton.

Cool. Thanks for the inside info. He seems to fit with the kind of "high-character" type guys that the Vikings have put a priority on lately. Team chemistry is easy to overlook. From listening to Frazier's interviews I know that he believes that this Vikings team has gelled and that their chemistry was a major part of their late season success.

Posted: **Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:02 pm**

Mothman wrote: I recall that too and when I went back and watched that game, I strongly disagreed with him. Believe who/what you want but I think some fans just see a guy running with separation and think he's open. However, if they aren't paying attention to when that happens, it can be very misleading. For example, if a QB's progression is from left to right, his first read on the left might come open but if he comes open late, after the QB has already moved on to another read, it doesn't matter. The receiver not only has to get open, he has to do so at the right time, according to the play design. A QB can't continually read the entire field throughout the duration of a play. He has to look from one spot to the next.

I recall that as well, and I thought at the time that defenses were reading the Vikings offense really well and giving Ponder a look that he couldn't throw into. Many of his interceptions came when the team was behind and he took a shot anyway. At the time, I felt like the real problem was Musgrave's offense moreso than Ponder or the receivers. The formula to beat the Vikes was set early on...if you blitzed the right or left side of the offense (that too seemed like it was getting telegraphed to the defense somehow) and blanketed the receiver that was always going to be hanging out about 7-10 yards downfield, Ponder basically was screwed. When the team was ahead, he'd throw it away or try and scramble, when they were behind, he'd take a big risk and didn't have the cannon to throw it into a tight space and turn it into a play. Way too often it was a pick.

That's not the kind of quarterback Ponder is. That's an offense that a guy like Brett Farve would fit into because he could actually muscle through that more often than not with his arm. There are plenty of schemes that can make use of a quarterback like Ponder, but Musgrave's frequently didn't seem like it was a fit. Which is weird because Musgrave has worked with a lot of quarterbacks that weren't big armed ball-chuckers. He backed up John Elway, though, back in the 90's. But he was responsible for tutoring Matt Schaub back in college, so you'd think that a guy like Ponder would be right up his alley.

Posted: **Sun Mar 03, 2013 8:59 pm**

Mothman wrote:
Yes and no. He did have the ball thrown his way but a receiver can fail without having the ball thrown to him and that can be why it's not thrown to him.

You'd be a tough coach to play for...

Mothman wrote: But they've benefited from good targets as much as anyone else. Manning, Favre and Brady are/were great but they've had Harrison, Wayne, Sharpe, Thomas, Freeman, Brooks, Branch, Moss, Welker.... and so on.

And Harvin and Rudolph?

Isn't it funny how the WRs, specifically Wright, looked better and were more "open" later in the season despite Harvin being out? They must have just gotten better all of a sudden...

Sorry, I still don't buy it. Ponder was bad for much of last season. *Epically* bad. He was bad's equivalent to Manning's good, and no WR's can dig balls thrown into the turf or lofted well over their heads. You're right that its impossible to assign blame to the lack of passing, but in the pros Ponder's performance was not just below average for any QB - it was *record setting*. I hope Spielman gets some more talent for the WR corps, but for things to improve Ponder is going to have to get better and more consistent, and not just better, but a *lot* better. If Spielman gets that, then he won't waste his highest picks reaching for WR talent when there are better players on the board at positions of equal need. If he doesn't and he has the same assessment as many on this board that the magic fairy WR is all Ponder needs to improve his game, I'd expect a reach at #23.

Posted: **Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:12 am**

Losing Percy Harvin and drafting Tavon Austin would be like losing Randy Moss and drafting Troy Williamson. It would be a desperation move, trying to replace a great player with someone similar that you think you can simply pick off the vine. It usually doesn't work out. Once Harvin is gone, he's gone. You don't just find another. Nor do you have to. Harvin certainly doesn't define the Vikings offense. What you see the Vikings doing is using him in whatever ways they can, when they're not actually relying on Adrian Peterson.

Posted: **Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:58 am**

VikingLord wrote:You'd be a tough coach to play for...

Perhaps I would but that answer doesn't reflect such a tough philosophy. A receiver's first job is to get open. His second is to catch the ball. I suspect that's a pretty common message among receivers coaches and their players.

And Harvin and Rudolph?

Ye, Ponder has benefitted from throwing to Harvin and Rudolph.

Isn't it funny how the WRs, specifically Wright, looked better and were more "open" later in the season despite Harvin being out? They must have just gotten better all of a sudden...

What's your point? Wright didn't play until Harvin was out. I didn't really think anyone else looked significantly better, although Simpson was more productive in the last 2 or 3 games. I think a variety of factors were at play later in the season: adjustments by Musgrave, improved protection, defenses selling out to stop AD, increased confidence from Ponder, etc.

I hope Spielman gets some more talent for the WR corps, but for things to improve Ponder is going to have to get better and more consistent, and not just better, but a *lot* better. If Spielman gets that, then he won't waste his highest picks reaching for WR talent when there are better players on the board at positions of equal need. If he doesn't and he has the same assessment as many on this board that the magic fairy WR is all Ponder needs to improve his game, I'd expect a reach at #23.

Sheesh...

Nobody is claiming the addition of a "magic fairy WR" is all Ponder needs to improve his game. They're saying the talent level at WR isn't where it should be and that improving that talent level will help Ponder improve his game. Whether the latter occurs or not, the talent at WR still needs an upgrade.

Virtually everyone on the board agrees that Ponder needs to improve his game so you're preaching to the choir on that subject. As for Spielman "reaching" for WR talent at #23 when there are better players on the board at positions of equal need... let's we should wait until the draft to see if that situation actually arises. We don't even know who will be on the board at #23. A WR might turn out to be the best choice for the Vikes with that pick. I certainly don't agree that Austin and Patterson are the only WRs worth taking there. Frankly, I don't even consider Austin worthy of a first round pick. He's extremely talented but he's too small, especially for a team whose 2 best receivers are already under 6' tall.

Posted: **Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:59 am**

80 PurplePride 84 wrote: The difference is the only thing Williamson and Moss had in common was speed. Austin is essentially a Harvin clone, not saying he'll ever be as good but he has the potential to be. My point was they're so similar that having Austin on your team with Harvin is redundant. I wasn't saying "If we trade Harvin, we should draft Austin." more as if I wouldn't draft Austin unless we trade Harvin.

If we traded Harvin and Austin, Patterson and Allen were all on the board at 23 I'd still prefer the latter two.

Austin ran a 4.34, Harvin ran a 4.41; Austin benched 225 14 times, Harvin benched 19 times. Harvin is a bigger and stronger than Austin with almost the same speed. I don't think they're as similar as you are making it seem.

Posted: **Mon Mar 04, 2013 3:51 pm**

Mothman wrote: Perhaps I would but that answer doesn't reflect such a tough philosophy. A receiver's first job is to get open. His second is to catch the ball. I suspect that's a pretty common message among receivers coaches and their players.

I'm sure it is, but define "open". How open does a guy have to be before you start attributing it more to the QB not seeing it/not throwing it?

Yours seems to be an awfully high standard.

VikingLord wrote:Isn't it funny how the WRs, specifically Wright, looked better and were more "open" later in the season despite Harvin being out? They must have just gotten better all of a sudden...

Mothman wrote: What's your point? Wright didn't play until Harvin was out. I didn't really think anyone else looked significantly better, although Simpson was more productive in the last 2 or 3 games. I think a variety of factors were at play later in the season: adjustments by Musgrave, improved protection, defenses selling out to stop AD, increased confidence from Ponder, etc.

My point is that the major improvement late in the season was behind center.

Mothman wrote: I certainly don't agree that Austin and Patterson are the only WRs worth taking there. Frankly, I don't even consider Austin worthy of a first round pick. He's extremely talented but he's too small, especially for a team whose 2 best receivers are already under 6' tall.

Austin is too small for what?

Have you watched Austin's highlights? You want rare speed to burn with a guy who can catch it and make guys miss after he catches it? You want a guy who is a threat to take it all the way every time he touches it, including on returns?

Austin isn't a guy who is going to muscle in tough receptions. OTOH, I thought what the Vikings need is a deep threat and a guy who can stretch the field. If Austin doesn't fit that bill, nobody at WR does in this year's draft save maybe Patterson.

If the Vikings need a possession type of receiver, a guy who runs the tough routes in traffic and goes up to get contested balls (NOTE - Vikings have that receiver already in Rudolph), then I agree Austin isn't that guy. I also don't think Keenan Allen is that guy, nor is Patterson. None of them possess the physicality necessary to play that sort of role, although Allen and Patterson could develop into those sorts of players while Austin is unlikely to become that kind of player.

Austin will go in the 1st round. I don't know who will take him, but the guy is a top-tier offensive threat in this year's draft.

Posted: **Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:04 pm**

Mothman wrote: I certainly don't agree that Austin and Patterson are the only WRs worth taking there. Frankly, I don't even consider Austin worthy of a first round pick. He's extremely talented but he's too small, especially for a team whose 2 best receivers are already under 6' tall.

Eh, I don't about that Jim. Everyone though DeSean Jackson was too small as well. Size isn't everything and I have a feeling Tavon Austin is going to be the next DeSean Jackson.

Just my opinion though. Personally, I just want this team to draft someone in the first or second round.

Posted: **Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:36 pm**

VikingLord wrote:I'm sure it is, but define "open". How open does a guy have to be before you start attributing it more to the QB not seeing it/not throwing it?

Yours seems to be an awfully high standard.

How so? Honestly, sometimes I can't tell if you have any standard for it at all. I don't mean that to sound sarcastic or snippy. It's just that every time this subject comes up you seem to ask a question like the one above or talk about how the QB has to throw receivers open. That's not always possible. As for my standard and how open a guy has to be to be considered open? It would go something like this: get a step on a defender, create some separation, establish great position so that even if coverage is tight, the QB actually has a good opportunity to throw the receiver open by placing the ball where he can get it and the defender can't get to it. I don't think that's such a high standard to set. As I see it, it's the receiver's job to beat coverage, not the quarterback's. The QB's job is to read the defense and get the ball to the receiver when the receiver creates an opportunity. More often than not, all of that has to occur within a timed window. That's just football, not a particularly high or unusual standard.

Vikes receivers got open last season but not nearly enough. Ponder missed some opportunities too. There's no denying that. There's room for improvement in both areas.

My point is that the major improvement late in the season was behind center.

I think that's an oversimplification.

Austin is too small for what?

He's too small to invest the 23rd pick in him when the team already has two smaller wide receivers on their roster. At 5'8", 174 lbs. Austin is significantly smaller than either of them. Durability will almost certainly be a concern at the NFL level and he projects as a slot receiver, which is not what the Vikings need. They arguably have two already.

Have you watched Austin's highlights? You want rare speed to burn with a guy who can catch it and make guys miss after he catches it? You want a guy who is a threat to take it all the way every time he touches it, including on returns?

Austin isn't a guy who is going to muscle in tough receptions. OTOH, I thought what the Vikings need is a deep threat and a guy who can stretch the field. If Austin doesn't fit that bill, nobody at WR does in this year's draft save maybe Patterson.

I've watched highlights of Austin and he's impressive. I'm not saying he isn't worth drafting or that he couldn't be a valuable addition to the team. I just don't think he's worth the investment of a first round pick for the Vikings when they already have Harvin and Wright. They need more size and playmaking ability on the outside and that's not really what Austin offers.

If the Vikings need a possession type of receiver, a guy who runs the tough routes in traffic and goes up to get contested balls (NOTE - Vikings have that receiver already in Rudolph), then I agree Austin isn't that guy. I also don't think Keenan Allen is that guy, nor is Patterson. None of them possess the physicality necessary to play that sort of role, although Allen and Patterson could develop into those sorts of players while Austin is unlikely to become that kind of player.

Exactly, which is why I don't think Austin is worth a first round pick for the Vikings. On the other hand, Allen possesses the size and skill set to excel on the outside.

Posted: **Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:40 pm**

HardcoreVikesFan wrote:Eh, I don't about that Jim. Everyone though DeSean Jackson was too small as well. Size isn't everything and I have a feeling Tavon Austin is going to be the next DeSean Jackson.

He might be... I just don't think that's what the Vikings need. As I said, they already have two undersized receivers and if Austin is going to excel at the NFL level, I doubt it will be at flanker or split end.

Posted: **Tue Mar 05, 2013 10:31 pm**

IMO Top 10 WRs for the Vikings (so not including Austin):

1. Patterson
2. Allen
3. Hopkins
4. Wheaton
5. Woods
6. Hunter
7. Patton
8. Rogers
9. Dobson
10. Williams

Posted: **Thu Mar 07, 2013 1:19 pm**

i like swope , marcus davis, boyce, sampson, weaton.

Posted: **Thu Mar 14, 2013 1:03 pm**

From West Virginia's Pro Day RT @McShay13: Geno Smith put on a show. Tavon Austin stole the show!

Posted: **Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:20 am**

Tavon Austin - WR - Player

After attending West Virginia's Pro Day on Thursday, ESPN's Ron Jaworski predicted WR Tavon Austin will be a top-15 pick.

"This guy is absolutely lightning quick," said Jaws. "He's one of the quickest guys I've ever seen and I've been around the game since 1973. This guy just accelerates when he gets the football and, although he's a little bit diminutive, I think this guy's gonna go in the top 15." Carolina would be an intriguing landing spot at No. 14. New Panthers GM Dave Gettleman -- a former Giants exec -- could see some Victor Cruz in the versatile Austin.
Source: 97.5 The Fanatic Mar 15 - 1:32 AM

Posted: **Fri Mar 15, 2013 5:45 pm**

Is he a scum bag like Harvin so he might fall?

Vikings Message Board.Com

WRs to watch

Re: WRs to watch

Re: WRs to watch

Re: WRs to watch

Re: WRs to watch

Re: WRs to watch

Re: WRs to watch

Re: WRs to watch

Re: WRs to watch

Re: WRs to watch

Re: WRs to watch

Re: WRs to watch

Re: WRs to watch

Re: WRs to watch

Re: WRs to watch

Re: WRs to watch