Golden Tate, the better Harvin.

[AgentDib]

We gave up a first round pick that could have been spent on an offensive lineman. Then, we gave up enough salary cap to resign Richard Sherman. And Harvin has yet to play a single down. Don't think OP is trolling. Harvin needs to prove his value. So far, all he has proven is that Minnesota got the better end of that trade.

You are correct that we are investing a huge amount of resources in Harvin. However, shouldn't that tell you something about what Schneider and Carroll expect out of him? It is ridiculous to say that anything has been "proven" yet when we are halfway through his first season in a six year deal.

 

[dunceface]

this is silly...I can only hope that Tate turns into a Harvin someday

 

[SanDiego49er]

Tate is pretty consistent and doesn't seem injured much. Harvin is obviously faster but gets injured. He hasn't put up huge stats in his career. But he has put up good ones. If Harvin could stay healthy for extended periods of time I think he would be really good.

 

[HawKnPeppa]

Nope. We don't need him. 9-1 without him. We don't need him.

I'm really glad our front office and coaching staff hasn't adopted that attitude. Let's just rest on our laurels and stop improving while the rest of the league grinds away, closes the gap and passes us by. More than one copycat team is already being built. That mean we need to continue to evolve and improve.

Don't you tire of seeing Russell try to keep a play alive with his feet for 4+ minutes while waiting for one of our receivers to come open? There is no OL fix that can cure that. The more times Russell puts the ball up when our WR's are one-on-one with little-to-no separation, the higher the chance of interceptions, or at the very least incompletions, don't you think? Harvin can get instant separation on anybody, and sorry, but Tate is not his equal, especially when it comes to speed. Harvin doesn't have to juke his way through the whole defense than hope he doesn't get caught. He gets in the open with near GT-like elusiveness, then turns on the burners. We don't have anybody on offense that has his combination of elusiveness, hands, route running and SPEED. He is kryptonite for nearly any defense you can imagine. How about we show consistent domination against good defenses rather than pulling out improbable hat tricks in the waning minutes of a game or in overtime? He helps us do that in a major way because he consistently wins his matchups in convincing fashion. Health permitting, he will be the most dynamic player on our offense.

Yes, the fact that he's highly paid, but not playing is a concern, as is his cap number, but how about not over-simplifying by saying Tate is his equal just to make your argument sound more legit. That is pure hyperbole. Tate brings a lot to the table that I'm sure we all appreciate, but not many players can make Harvin redundant. Tate certainly doesn't.

 

[KARAVARUS]

I just can't wait til Percy gets his first TD. I have a feeling it's going to be monumental.

 

[themunn]

I felt Harvin was overrated when he was a Viking and he has yet to do anything to disprove that IMO.
The way people talk on here is as if everything good Tate does, Harvin would turn into a TD, yet his career high is 8 TDs (in a season where he touched the ball 130 times), just one less than Tate's (who touched the ball 48 times).

I expect Harvin will come in and be very good, but I expect a LOT of people to be disappointed given their lofty expectations from him

 

[ijumpedship]

It's going to be hard for me to like Tate. I liked him a lot coming out of ND. But yes. I'm still bitter about the hit he put on Sean lee.

Tate is a very different player than Harvin. Harvin is incredibly dynamic. Tate not so much. Harvin is always hurt though.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Did someone actually say we don't need Harvin? That's so cute.

 

[ZLDRider]

I cannot believe that this has gone on for 4 pages.

You guys should have just ignored this just based upon the author's grammar and spelling (referencing "controvertible opinion").

I mean, what the hell does that mean?

Pffft!

I think he was trying to say, "controversial opinion".

His whole argument is lame and uninformed. And then on top of it, he cannot punctuate worth $#!+. He said:

"I know I know. Everyone is claiming Harvin to be the "messiah" of this franchise but, I disagree. I think we have a better player here already. His name is Golden Tate. What can't Tate do at this point that Percy can? For some reason, I cannot see it.

Punt returns?

Bubble screens?

Yac?

In my controvertible opinion. I say jettison Harvin to save cap and, let our TRUE and proven stars be the next BIG THING.

Seriously, what has Harvin done that Tate cannot do?"

Let's re-punctuate this correctly:

"I know, I know. Everyone is claiming Harvin is the "messiah" of this franchise. But, I disagree. I think we have a better player here already. His name is Golden Tate. What can Percy do, at this point, that Tate can't? For some reason, I cannot see it.

Punt returns?

Bubble screens?

Yac?

In my controversial opinion, I say jettison Harvin to save cap and let our true and proven stars be the next big thing.

Seriously, what has Harvin done that Tate cannot do?"

The argument is still uninformed but, at least now it is grammatically correct.

LOL

 

[-The Glove-]

Yeah another playmaker is exactly what we DON'T NEED! Nevermind Rice is out. Nevermind it gives RW a dynamic safety valve. We DON'T NEED it AT ALL! We're 9-1. We have no room for improvement.

 

[getnasty]

Worst OP ever. Percy Harvin is a top 10 maybe top 5 WR in the league and a match up nightmare. If Golden Tate is on the same level then thats a good thing. Pete and John arn't going to trade away picks and give Percy all that money without a plan.

 

[ijumpedship]

Harvin gets carries. Does Tate?

 

[volsunghawk]

Golden Tate is ours and he is amazing. Percy Harvin has been amazing and now that he is ours let's hope he's still amazing. Then we'll have 2 guys that are amazing.

WTF Zeb? Why on earth would you want THAT MUCH amazing? Don't you know that teams are only allowed to have certain amounts, and that if you get too much amazing, you get penalized by the league?

Seriously, why on earth would you want Harvin's presence opening things up more for Tate? Why would you want our offense to be even more dynamic than it currently is? It's like you want to outscore the opponents by multiple TDs per game or something.

That's just immature and irresponsible. I demand that you declare your loyalty to either Tate or Harvin immediately, as should we all. And whoever receives the least amount of loyalty will be fed to a pack of hungry wolves.

Wolves, Zeb. :141847_bnono:

 

[Evil_Shenanigans]

He doesn't have to come in and dominate. All he has to do is coffee in and give defensive coordinators one more thing to worry about. And that helps out the whole team.

Therein lies Harvins biggest asset. Any time he is on the field he will thin defenses. If anything it makes life easier for our other receivers. You simply cannot ignore a guy like him in any offensive set.

 

[Popeyejones]

Nah, Tate isn't the better player.

I do think Tate is really underrated though, and has been in the past even more than he is now.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Harvin is not clearly better. How can you even say that? The dude hasn't even played a down. He's collected millions in salary without doing anything.

So far he's the worst trade in the history of the franchise because he has consumed massive salary cap without ever playing. He has contributed nothing. NOTHING.

I'll buy in when he shows up to play.

Would an NFL front office pay a 1st and a 3rd for Golden Tate? I love me some Tate, but the answer to that question is clearly NO.

That tells you all you need to know.

 

[drdiags]

Several attacks of the poster not the post going on, not sure what is up with that. I didn't think when the Harvin trade was made that Tate had a future with the club. He still may not, but I could see the team trying to re-sign him and letting Rice and a few others walk.

As far as cutting Harvin after this season, I just don't see how that makes sense financially. His big numbers kick in next year and the amount of dead money doesn't make sense unless he is an extreme locker room cancer.

 

[volsunghawk]

Harvin is not clearly better. How can you even say that? The dude hasn't even played a down. He's collected millions in salary without doing anything.

So far he's the worst trade in the history of the franchise because he has consumed massive salary cap without ever playing. He has contributed nothing. NOTHING.

I'll buy in when he shows up to play.

Would an NFL front office pay a 1st and a 3rd for Golden Tate? I love me some Tate, but the answer to that question is clearly NO.

That tells you all you need to know.

No, that doesn't tell you all you need to know.

I think Tate is awesome and am enjoying his breakout year. I think Harvin is at least Tate's equal in talent, and is likely more talented and physically gifted. I look forward to seeing what he'll do for us.

But appealing to the cost paid for Harvin is kinda ridiculous. Remember, the Raiders paid a 1st and a 2nd for Carson Palmer. The Cowboys paid a 1st, 3rd, and 6th for Roy Williams. It's a bad measuring stick.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Harvin is not clearly better. How can you even say that? The dude hasn't even played a down. He's collected millions in salary without doing anything.

So far he's the worst trade in the history of the franchise because he has consumed massive salary cap without ever playing. He has contributed nothing. NOTHING.

I'll buy in when he shows up to play.

Would an NFL front office pay a 1st and a 3rd for Golden Tate? I love me some Tate, but the answer to that question is clearly NO.

That tells you all you need to know.

No, that doesn't tell you all you need to know.

I think Tate is awesome and am enjoying his breakout year. I think Harvin is at least Tate's equal in talent, and is likely more talented and physically gifted. I look forward to seeing what he'll do for us.

But appealing to the cost paid for Harvin is kinda ridiculous. Remember, the Raiders paid a 1st and a 2nd for Carson Palmer. The Cowboys paid a 1st, 3rd, and 6th for Roy Williams. It's a bad measuring stick.

Tate is great. But he is not more physically gifted than Harvin. Since you don't like my trade scenario ...... if they were both on the market today beyond a doubt Harvin would get more. I can't point to one single thing that says a team would value Tate more than Harvin.

If you want to be blind to the truth that is your deal. I tend to be more realistic on these things.

 

[volsunghawk]

Would an NFL front office pay a 1st and a 3rd for Golden Tate? I love me some Tate, but the answer to that question is clearly NO.

That tells you all you need to know.

No, that doesn't tell you all you need to know.

I think Tate is awesome and am enjoying his breakout year. I think Harvin is at least Tate's equal in talent, and is likely more talented and physically gifted. I look forward to seeing what he'll do for us.

But appealing to the cost paid for Harvin is kinda ridiculous. Remember, the Raiders paid a 1st and a 2nd for Carson Palmer. The Cowboys paid a 1st, 3rd, and 6th for Roy Williams. It's a bad measuring stick.

Tate is great. But he is not more physically gifted than Harvin. Since you don't like my trade scenario ...... if they were both on the market today beyond a doubt Harvin would get more. I can't point to one single thing that says a team would value Tate more than Harvin.

If you want to be blind to the truth that is your deal. I tend to be more realistic on these things.

Pal, you need to understand that I'm AGREEING with you about Harvin being a greater talent than Tate.

What I'm disagreeing with is that you can judge the value of these players based on what a team would give up in draft picks. We have seen multiple examples of desperate teams giving up ridiculous amounts of compensation for less talent. If you want to be blind to THAT, go right ahead.

And it would serve you well to put your condescending attitude back on the shelf.