Thread: Happy homecoming, Thomas Tapeh

[size=13pt]Happy homecoming[/size]

After four years away, new Vikings fullback Thomas Tapeh is excited to play for his hometown team

By Brian Murphy
[email protected]

Article Last Updated: 08/11/2008 10:35:24 PM CDT

Although he dropped an easy pass ala T-Will, he did have a nice TD catch in Friday nights game.

Since we didn't run the ball that much while he was in there & AD not at all, we still don't know how much value he will bring to this team opening holes for the RB's, which is what he was brought in here to do.

I liked Tony Richardson, but he was getting long in the tooth for a back.
So I think the move to someone a little younger that helped Westbrook in his running game last year will pan out.

I still would rather have stuck with Richardson.
For what he may bring with more speed, and better pass catching ability, he's nowhere near the level that Richardson was at when it comes to being a pure blocking fullback.
He was one of the best in the game, and you really need to take of those purple shades if you think that Tapeh is better.

"i_bleed_purple" wrote:

I still would rather have stuck with Richardson.
For what he may bring with more speed, and better pass catching ability, he's nowhere near the level that Richardson was at when it comes to being a pure blocking fullback.
He was one of the best in the game, and you really need to take of those purple shades if you think that Tapeh is better.

How many times does one have to explain what the FO is trying to do or the mind set behind this move?
Tony Rich was a great blocker at FB. He was getting old, not quite as fast and was not a red zone threat as much. They traded him and got Tapeh who is a good blocker (spent time blocking for another great RB) thought not at the same level as T Rich, is fast (better than T Rich), way younger than T Rich and also a red zone threat (better than T Rich) and can catch the ball (better than T Rich).
How on earth is this not a good move? He brings so much to the table and adds more options to the offense and many years to look forward to (barring injury of course). So yes Tapeh is better for the offense and T Rich is better for BLOCKING. So if you think T Rich is better than Tapeh for the Vikings as a team, then you need to take off those emotional shades.

So,
you have insight into what the FO plans on doing?
You would think that if they planned on having a fullback as a passing threat, that they would also use the runningbacks and TE's more, but that really hasn't happened too much.
We'll see how Tapeh's blocking compares to Richardson, but I bet Richardson was huge in helping AD have the year he had last year.
He even said himself, when asked who helped him the most that year, he said Richardson.
Tapeh is a better long term solution, no doubt, but we are a rushing team, ad having an all-pro Fullback can only help.
Taking him away only hurts us.

"i_bleed_purple" wrote:

So,
you have insight into what the FO plans on doing?
You would think that if they planned on having a fullback as a passing threat, that they would also use the runningbacks and TE's more, but that really hasn't happened too much.
We'll see how Tapeh's blocking compares to Richardson, but I bet Richardson was huge in helping AD have the year he had last year.
He even said himself, when asked who helped him the most that year, he said Richardson.
Tapeh is a better long term solution, no doubt, but we are a rushing team, ad having an all-pro Fullback can only help.
Taking him away only hurts us.

I am sure its no secret that the Vikings are trying to throw the ball more than they have been doing. News from Camp say they are using the TE and RBs more in passing drills (e.g Schancoe having a great camp and catching many balls, new plays spreading AD wide, BB working extensively with T-Jack and other WRs etc...). We have had only ONE pre-season game of which the first team offense had ZERO run plays. PLus they signed a # 1 WR. That to me says the Vikings want to upgrade their passing game. Hence, Tapeh is a better fit (considering the factors listed above and others).

P/S: I don't have a clear insight on what the FO is doing. My statement is a result of the statements from the FO and the moves being made. All of which are no secret to anyone.

"i_bleed_purple" wrote:

So,
you have insight into what the FO plans on doing?

Of course he does, he listens to me.

;D

You would think that if they planned on having a fullback as a passing threat, that they would also use the runningbacks and TE's more, but that really hasn't happened too much.

Just because they haven't done it much doesn't mean it isn't part of the grand scheme.
Truth of the matter is we have seen our FB's used in the passing game, not only last year but in the first pre-season game.

If (Big IF) the OL can hold its own, we will see alot of stuff from our FB's and TE's my friend.

Tapeh is a better long term solution, no doubt, but we are a rushing team, ad having an all-pro Fullback can only help.
Taking him away only hurts us.

Take a look at this team.
There is nothing but alot of "Long Term Solutions" on the field and very few short term solutions.

T-rich was good and a class act and I am sure his insight helped AD but the correct answer is to get a guy who is more than a "Blocker" out there as that will cause D-cords to wonder what we are running and not know what we are running.

Tapeh's versatility will become quite evident in that regard this year.
I have it from the FO.

;D

I was upset when I found out the FO let Richardson go.
He was nothing but a class act and a great player-leader.
After finding out they signed Tapeh, I was more than happy.
Guys, he not only helped lead block for Westbrook, he opened holes for Maroney and Barber at the U of M.
All three of those backs are 1,000+ yards/year backs in their respective seasons with Tapeh as their FB.

Will Tapeh fill the giant shoes Richardson left?
Who knows.
But with his youth, I'm sure he'll be one of the better Vikings.

"misplacedminnesotan" wrote:

I liked Tony Richardson, but he was getting long in the tooth for a back.
So I think the move to someone a little younger that helped Westbrook in his running game last year will pan out.

what does that even mean?