Vikings Message Board.Com

Nice run, Ben.

Seriously, I'm glad they brought him in to kick the tires, but it seemed a foregone conclusion that he would be gone this offseason, given that his cap hit was like 2.5 million.

it appeared to be a security gap move ... we had all three RB's from last season suspended or hurt

hope it works out for him ...

So Tate wasn't better than Asiata or Banyard? At that price...

What a front office.

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.

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 don't understand all of the hate for this move. Do you guys really think you know better than the coaches and FO? Like Norv Turner is sitting around twirling a handlebar mustache like "Mwahhh, this kid can play, but I'm going to give him no touches and then cut him because I'm eeevil."
Clearly Tate has issues. Probably work ethic or character issues. The team that drafted him didn't want to keep him, the team that picked him up as a FA cut him, and now we cut him. He was worth kicking the tires. It didn't work out. Bye bye.

But hey, I guess it was a bad move, because some armchair GMs think so.

Ardenn wrote:I don't understand all of the hate for this move. Do you guys really think you know better than the coaches and FO? Like Norv Turner is sitting around twirling a handlebar mustache like "Mwahhh, this kid can play, but I'm going to give him no touches and then cut him because I'm eeevil."
Clearly Tate has issues. Probably work ethic or character issues. The team that drafted him didn't want to keep him, the team that picked him up as a FA cut him, and now we cut him. He was worth kicking the tires. It didn't work out. Bye bye.

But hey, I guess it was a bad move, because some armchair GMs think so.

Great recipe for a board post: don't agree with other people's view? Screw them, and call them armchair GMs just because they have an opinion.

I am pretty sure I DO NOT know more than the executives in the NFL, or I would be in the NFL. However, I believe that Ben Tate is a better player than Matt Asiata and Joe Banyard. I wanted to see more of him on the field. We all knew who Matt Asiata was as a player. We didn't really *know* who Ben Tate was. What does it matter now though.

HardcoreVikesFan wrote: Great recipe for a board post: don't agree with other people's view? Screw them, and call them armchair GMs just because they have an opinion.

I am pretty sure I DO NOT know more than the executives in the NFL, or I would be in the NFL. However, I believe that Ben Tate is a better player than Matt Asiata and Joe Banyard. I wanted to see more of him on the field. We all knew who Matt Asiata was as a player. We didn't really *know* who Ben Tate was. What does it matter now though.

Another great recipe for a board post: Bash the front office for cutting a player that can't stay on a team.

Guys, address the message but please don't shoot the messenger.

Tate was a non expensive stop gap; that possibly could have been a big win long term..

When we picked him up all of backs were out or possibly out with injuries or suspended ...

Not as bad as the Josh Freeman pickup I guess.

PurpleKoolaid wrote:Not as bad as the Josh Freeman pickup I guess.

To be honest though, if you're a GM, why would you not take a chance at Freeman or Tate?? At the time, the Vikings were struggling at both positions. If you have a chance to pick up guys like that fill positions of need them you do it. If they pan out and play good, awesome. If not, who cares, dump them. I blame the coaching staff for Freeman more than anything. Either way, if you have a chance to make a move like that, you pull the trigger

Pondering Her Percy wrote: To be honest though, if you're a GM, why would you not take a chance at Freeman or Tate?? At the time, the Vikings were struggling at both positions. If you have a chance to pick up guys like that fill positions of need them you do it. If they pan out and play good, awesome. If not, who cares, dump them. I blame the coaching staff for Freeman more than anything. Either way, if you have a chance to make a move like that, you pull the trigger

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 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.