Thread: Vikings Rookies Gaining Valuable Experience

Originally Posted by "HEY" #1085434

Toby Gerhart - another impressive effort as it was his second start in Adrian Peterson's absence. He was making good runs with the little opportunities he got. As for the "Can't believe how a few on here have hacked on Toby. Not fast enough". I have a feeling that I was one of the people you were pointing to so I'll try to deepen the statement "Not fast enough" as it's obviously missing a significant second part.

I do NOT believe that Gerhart is not fast enough to be a starter in the NFL.

Instead, I do believ that Gerhart is not fast enough to be one of the greatest running backs in the NFL.

In other words: the difference is that I think Toby is fast enough to be a starter who can do what a running back is asked to do, but he will never be a Hall of Famer.

In less words: Toby can be good, but not amazing. (that's Adrian's role )

think its more a question of the way you want the offense to go as in some schemes Toby would be the ideal fit. We're lucky with someone like AP who has both speed and the ability to run over players - not all RB's can do both of those. Speed isn't everything - look at when Bennett was here and we relied on his speed so much, if he was boxed in then that was that and he went nowhere.
Toby may not be a HOFer but still can be a damn good player and there are many of those who have never made it to the HOF

Originally Posted by "AngloVike" #1085475

think its more a question of the way you want the offense to go as in some schemes Toby would be the ideal fit. We're lucky with someone like AP who has both speed and the ability to run over players - not all RB's can do both of those. Speed isn't everything - look at when Bennett was here and we relied on his speed so much, if he was boxed in then that was that and he went nowhere.
Toby may not be a HOFer but still can be a damn good player and there are many of those who have never made it to the HOF

I need to go check and see if I have you on the "Those with a clue" spreadsheet.

If I don't have you on it, consider yourself included.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1085460

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1085457

I think Toby was a reach. I said it on day one and I have seen nothing...nothing that tells me this guys isn't a FB. The fact that we traded up to draft a RB is crazy to me. Especially with backs like Dywer and Blount still on the board. Rule # 1 in the NFL, never trade up to draft a Rb, especially if said RB looks slower than poop rolling up hill.

I agree on your point that we probably could have got the same type of back without having to move up.

What I don't agree is that he hasn't shown anything. My guess, because his touches have been limited as a result from playing behind AD and the early injury he had, his progress hasn't been as fast as Blounts has in Tampa but he has shown progress nonetheless.

Even you would have to agree 66 yards in a half is pretty good running especially when you consider that the inside of your line are backups and what they were going up against with respect to defense.

When your only threat gets 66 yards in a half that is pretty good.

I should have been specific, He hasn't shown anything as a halfback. I'm not upset with him as a player but more about what we gave up to select him. Gave up too much for a player without much return(limited behind AD)

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1085545

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1085460

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1085457

I think Toby was a reach. I said it on day one and I have seen nothing...nothing that tells me this guys isn't a FB. The fact that we traded up to draft a RB is crazy to me. Especially with backs like Dywer and Blount still on the board. Rule # 1 in the NFL, never trade up to draft a Rb, especially if said RB looks slower than poop rolling up hill.

I agree on your point that we probably could have got the same type of back without having to move up.

What I don't agree is that he hasn't shown anything. My guess, because his touches have been limited as a result from playing behind AD and the early injury he had, his progress hasn't been as fast as Blounts has in Tampa but he has shown progress nonetheless.

Even you would have to agree 66 yards in a half is pretty good running especially when you consider that the inside of your line are backups and what they were going up against with respect to defense.

When your only threat gets 66 yards in a half that is pretty good.

I should have been specific, He hasn't shown anything as a halfback. I'm not upset with him as a player but more about what we gave up to select him. Gave up too much for a player without much return(limited behind AD)

OK, I can buy that.

I think we screwed the pooch last year with our first two picks. As you said, we could have had Blount later just like we could have taken a better CB later and addressed the DL and possibly tried out McCoy (Still undediced but looking OK) or Clausen (ick) with our first two picks.