Shake owns this thread

(05-03-2016, 10:24 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I don't see a ninja, so I'm going to assume you seriously believe this. 

As a KR

Patterson: 109 returns, 30.1 yard avg, 4 TDs in 3 seasons (1st team All-Pro in 2013)
Tate: 190 returns, 24.6 yard avg, 2 TDs in 6 seasons

As a WR

Patterson: 80 catches, 863 yards, 5 TDs in 3 seasons
Tate: 57 catches, 901 yards, 6 TDs in 6 seasons


Patterson is also younger, bigger and faster. Literally the only thing Tate has on Patterson is that CP has never returned punts at the NFL level. Patterson has been a phenomenal KR though and the more  productive WR.

But, but, but...Tate played for the Patriots so you know he's a beast!!! 

I know this about Patterson--the Bengals couldn't stop him.

(05-03-2016, 12:13 AM)Se ky bengal Wrote: F
 You forgot the 

His replacement screws up a couple of times and costs us a game then all we will hear will be .....   At least tate didn't cost us games with his fair catches.   

(05-05-2016, 01:04 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: His replacement screws up a couple of times and costs us a game then all we will hear will be .....   At least tate didn't cost us games with his fair catches.   

Since this is a thread about Cordarelle Patterson, how is CP more likely to cost us a game than Brandon Tate? Patterson has only fumbled once every 106.5 touches in his career, while Tate has fumbled once every 68.5 touches.

Besides fumbles, I'm having trouble thinking of anything obvious that a returner could do to cost you a game. I suppose mental blunders could cost us field position. We all know Tate has a stellar record there.

(05-05-2016, 01:04 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: His replacement screws up a couple of times and costs us a game then all we will hear will be .....   At least tate didn't cost us games with his fair catches.   

Whatever imaginary risk you made up, worth it.

This is literally trading a nothing for a slightly something.

(05-05-2016, 11:24 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Since this is a thread about Cordarelle Patterson, how is CP more likely to cost us a game than Brandon Tate? Patterson has only fumbled once every 106.5 touches in his career, while Tate has fumbled once every 68.5 touches.

Besides fumbles, I'm having trouble thinking of anything obvious that a returner could do to cost you a game. I suppose mental blunders could cost us field position. We all know Tate has a stellar record there.

Catching punts inside the 10. 

Not fair catching on high short punt/kick

This is just the typical issues besides a fumble.    

I don't like tate at all but I do think when he finally is gone his consistency will be missed.   He is pretty good at situational awareness.    He rarely costs us yards.    

(05-05-2016, 12:07 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Catching punts inside the 10. 

Not fair catching on high short punt/kick

This is just the typical issues besides a fumble.    

I don't like tate at all but I do think when he finally is gone his consistency will be missed.   He is pretty good at situational awareness.    He rarely costs us yards.    

Yeah those are the mental blunders I was talking about. You say Tate is good with his situational awareness, which is ironic because I think that's the #1 complaint with Tate over the years. He's usually good for 2-3 mental blunders per year.

Fwiw, I'm not worried about replacing Tate because I honestly can't recall any Bengals return guy that was awful. We always seem to have pretty decent return guys. Tremain Mack, Tab Perry and PDub were good. Even guys like Brandon Bennett, Quan Cosby and Bernard Scott were servicable. 

It makes me wonder why some are so afraid of change.

(05-05-2016, 12:39 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Yeah those are the mental blunders I was talking about. You say Tate is good with his situational awareness, which is ironic because I think that's the #1 complaint with Tate over the years. He's usually good for 2-3 mental blunders per year.

Fwiw, I'm not worried about replacing Tate because I honestly can't recall any Bengals return guy that was awful. We always seem to have pretty decent return guys. Tremain Mack, Tab Perry and PDub were good. Even guys like Brandon Bennett, Quan Cosby and Bernard Scott were servicable. 

It makes me wonder why some are so afraid of change.

Well, Keiwan Ratliff was trash so there's that.

(05-05-2016, 12:53 PM)Stormborn Wrote: Well, Keiwan Ratliff was trash so there's that.

Meh. Only returned punts and averaged 7.5 yards per return. Not good, but it's not all that bad either, imo.

(05-05-2016, 01:36 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Meh. Only returned punts and averaged 7.5 yards per return. Not good, but it's not all that bad either, imo.

The 2 years after he averaged over 12 yards per returned, he averaged 5.6 and 6.5 yards per return. Plus he always got burned as a corner. He was a worse Tate at corner.

But in the overall point I agree, memories of Keiwan Ratliff shouldn't stop them for looking for an actual upgrade.

(05-05-2016, 06:09 PM)Stormborn Wrote: The 2 years after he averaged over 12 yards per returned, he averaged 5.6 and 6.5 yards per return. Plus he always got burned as a corner. He was a worse Tate at corner.

But in the overall point I agree, memories of Keiwan Ratliff shouldn't stop them for looking for an actual upgrade.

I definitely agree he was an awful corner, but I'm talking strictly about the risk of replacing your return guy, in response to what Lucie said. Strictly as a PR, Ratliff was pretty bad, but it's not like he was killing us out there with fumbles, etc. 6.5 yards per return is only 1.5 yards less than what Tate is bringing. Actually, I just looked it up and Tate averaged 6.3 on punt returns last season.

Like you said though, it's just one guy out of dozens that we've had, and most of those guys were serviceable at worst. Even the worst example didn't exactly hurt the team much. It's a risk/reward thing. It's not that hard to find a KR/PR who is at least serviceable, so there's not much risk there, imo. If you find a special returner though, it could really swing a couple games our way each year.

Didn't the NFL just change the rule that touchbacks now start at the 25 yard line? If so, the value of a KR just went way down. The value is only going to come from PR and receiving which neither wows you. The coaches seem to like Tate and we know how much they value late draft picks.

(05-05-2016, 07:23 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I definitely agree he was an awful corner, but I'm talking strictly about the risk of replacing your return guy, in response to what Lucie said. Strictly as a PR, Ratliff was pretty bad, but it's not like he was killing us out there with fumbles, etc. 6.5 yards per return is only 1.5 yards less than what Tate is bringing. Actually, I just looked it up and Tate averaged 6.3 on punt returns last season.

Like you said though, it's just one guy out of dozens that we've had, and most of those guys were serviceable at worst. Even the worst example didn't exactly hurt the team much. It's a risk/reward thing. It's not that hard to find a KR/PR who is at least serviceable, so there's not much risk there, imo. If you find a special returner though, it could really swing a couple games our way each year.

we have that with Adam though

Welp, Patterson looks better than Tate to me, but what do I know?

I've said this before in other threads.  Cordarrelle Patterson is one of the most gifted football players I have ever seen with the ball in his hands.  he has world class speed, excellent field vision, and incredible change-of-direction skills.  He can do anything Percy Harvin can do except he is 3 inches taller and 20 lbs heavier.  I can't believe that the Vikings can't figure out some way to get the ball in his hands.

he only played one year of D-1 college ball at Tennessee and put up the following numbers......Rushing (12.3 per carry with 3 tds)...Receiving (16.9 per catch, 5 tds).....Kick return (28.0 avg, 1 td)....Punt return (25.3 avg, 1 td).  He only had a total of 99 touches, but gained 1858 yards and scored 10 tds.

In 3 seasons with the Vikings he has.....Rushing (12.1 per carry, 4 td)....Kick return (30.1 avg #2 all-time, 4 td)  However his receiving numbers are not impressive (80 catches, 10.8 avg, 5 td)

(05-06-2016, 10:53 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: we have that with Adam though

Last season Adam had 26 combined returns compared to 45 for Brandon Tate. So why not replace the primary return guy? You could potentially ugrade the position while allowing our All-Pro CB to concentrate on his primary role as he moves into his age 33 season.

Tbh, Patterson is better than Adam too.

This should be moved out of the free agent forum.

(05-03-2016, 10:02 PM)bfine32 Wrote: We had the 4th best drive starting Line of Scrimmage in the NFL last year. But don't let that stop a good rant. 

I'm pretty sure that includes starting position after punts as well and not just on kickoffs. We had good field position after punts due to the defense.

Tate's KO returns sucked.

http://espn.go.com/blog/cincinnati-bengals/post/_/id/11873/bengals-brandon-tate-kick-return-fumble-defends

https://www.reddit.com/r/cincinnati/comments/2iexvj/brandon_tate_vs_a_hamster/

(05-03-2016, 10:02 PM)bfine32 Wrote: We had the 4th best drive starting Line of Scrimmage in the NFL last year. But don't let that stop a good rant. 

All because of Tates amazing returns right? I always wondered why if Tate was such an elite returner like you think, then why do we constantly want Pacman back there when we really need something, weird huh?



Tate: Avg: 24.6 , 40+ Returns: 9, Fumbles: 6, TD: 2
Patterson: Avg: 30.1, 40+ Returns: 20, Fumbles: 2, TD: 4

Weird how Tate doesnt look that elite against an elite returner huh, but dont let that stop your consistent lazy/useless stat.