PDA

View Full Version : Our Starting QB is Injury Prone



kevoncox
02-03-2012, 10:19 PM
I want badly to believe that we did the right thing on selecting this guy 12th overall I just have serious concerns on his ability to hold up. Look at his injuries in 3 consecutive years.

Junior year - Throwing Shoulder injury
Senior year - Elbow injuries
Rookie season - 3 different serious injuries including Hip, Concussion and Hip again.

I just don't know if this guy is capable of being the guy for 8 years or more.
Because of this I really want us to swallow our pride, take the media firestorm and draft Robert Griffin.
Capable of sub 4.4 speed, Rocket for an arm and compact throwing motion (except when deep), he is the best QB we will have a shot at for years. He is super intelligent, can read defenses and is very careful with the ball. Simply put he should be the #1 pick ahead of Luck but that bandwagon is out of control. Picture Vick, minus the off field drama, with the brain of an Oxford graduate, and the passing poise of Montana. This pick at #3 will define this franchise for another decade and we will be kicking ourselves if we mess this up. In a league driven by the passing game, why we seem to be ok with "good enough" as opposed to an excellent Qb, is beyond me. Other needs be damned, this kid was on team devoid of talent minus a 1st round WR and he lead them to a bowl game and bowl victory. Draft Griffin and trade Ponder for a 2nd or 3rd to the Bills, Skins, Cards, and or Browns.

I don't care what system you play in 4000+ yards throwing, 37tds and 6 ints, while completing 72% of his passes is obscene.

Baylor's Robert Griffin III: 2011 Heisman Trophy Winner & Most Exciting Player in the Country! - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO3QkCbt0ys&feature=related)

Marrdro
02-04-2012, 07:03 AM
Comeon my friend. The kid is tough. Learning how to take a beating is all part of the learning process that young QB's go through.

Besides, its more important that we talk about things like his 3rd down passing efficiency, especially when he had crap, other than Percy to throw to.

Get on board, this staff is going to grow a QB on the field. Like it or not, that will have its ups and downs, but in the end, we will have a QB that can win games for us.

ConnecticutViking
02-04-2012, 07:46 AM
I agree Kevon, I like Ponder, but not at the 12th overall pick. You won't see them go for RG3 though. Like I said, Ponder was a reach at number 12 and anyone who says that the Vikings got the guy they really wanted can look at Andy Dalton, the 35th overall pick in the same draft.

kevoncox
02-04-2012, 08:06 AM
Comeon my friend. The kid is tough. Learning how to take a beating is all part of the learning process that young QB's go through.

Besides, its more important that we talk about things like his 3rd down passing efficiency, especially when he had crap, other than Percy to throw to.

Get on board, this staff is going to grow a QB on the field. Like it or not, that will have its ups and downs, but in the end, we will have a QB that can win games for us.

Marr,
I don't think he has "it". I simply get the career backup feeling of dread from him. He lacks the arm strength to throw the 15 yard out, 18 yard comeback, and almost anything on the wide side of the field. His arm is adequate at best. You can't be groomed to win if you can't stay on the field. He isn't learning to take a beating, he i getting knocked out of games. I will like to point out that all the grooming in the world made Sanchez an average QB. When a guy doesn't have "it", you are wasting your time.

The possible combanation of Harvin, Peterson and Robert Griffen III, has me drooling. When you start doing your research, I think you will change your tune. What I saw from this guy is it. He does everything you want from a leader at the QB position.

kevoncox
02-04-2012, 08:58 AM
I agree Kevon, I like Ponder, but not at the 12th overall pick. You won't see them go for RG3 though. Like I said, Ponder was a reach at number 12 and anyone who says that the Vikings got the guy they really wanted can look at Andy Dalton, the 35th overall pick in the same draft.

I don't care about the reach. The issues is, he isn't the guy. Reach and get your player. We reached and got a back up.

jmcdon00
02-04-2012, 09:54 AM
I would have no problem with them drafting RGIII if he is the BPA. I think he would be an upgrade to Ponder. We are in a QB league where more often than not the best QB wins.
The problem I see is that he very well might be gone by the third pick.

Caine
02-04-2012, 10:25 AM
Honestly, we could use any of the top 4 projected players. Obviously Luck is off the board, but I agree that if the opportunity presents itself, we upgrade our QB position as I am not overly impressed with Ponder either. While I see him as an upgrade over Jackson, I don't see him as the answer.

However, nothing would surprise me less than to have our FO trade DOWN, and grab a player whose name we won't even remember in 4 years. Then squander the extra picks on other pedestrian players who will guarantee us another draft slot in the top 10 next year.

I would love to be optimistic here, but with the state of our Power structure (Wilf with his family and their fingers in), our Coaching situation (Frazier without a clear direction, lack of cohesive plan, and an empty-shirt GM) and our player situation (No receivers other than Harvin, Peterson hurt, No O-line, crap secondary, Ponder not what we'd hoped for), I'm actually sort of dreading our next series of moves. I think that we have failed to address our fundamental errors, and everything after that has been a poorly placed band-aid attempting to cover up that glaring deficiency.

Caine

kevoncox
02-04-2012, 11:02 AM
Honestly, we could use any of the top 4 projected players. Obviously Luck is off the board, but I agree that if the opportunity presents itself, we upgrade our QB position as I am not overly impressed with Ponder either. While I see him as an upgrade over Jackson, I don't see him as the answer.

However, nothing would surprise me less than to have our FO trade DOWN, and grab a player whose name we won't even remember in 4 years. Then squander the extra picks on other pedestrian players who will guarantee us another draft slot in the top 10 next year.

I would love to be optimistic here, but with the state of our Power structure (Wilf with his family and their fingers in), our Coaching situation (Frazier without a clear direction, lack of cohesive plan, and an empty-shirt GM) and our player situation (No receivers other than Harvin, Peterson hurt, No O-line, crap secondary, Ponder not what we'd hoped for), I'm actually sort of dreading our next series of moves. I think that we have failed to address our fundamental errors, and everything after that has been a poorly placed band-aid attempting to cover up that glaring deficiency.

Caine

I think we will get the 1st rounder correct. However, we traded down several times in past drafts and did not get the correct amount of picks for it.

kevoncox
02-04-2012, 11:03 AM
I would have no problem with them drafting RGIII if he is the BPA. I think he would be an upgrade to Ponder. We are in a QB league where more often than not the best QB wins.
The problem I see is that he very well might be gone by the third pick.

He may turn out to be the man but I don't expect him to. At best matt Hasselbeck

Freakout
02-04-2012, 11:09 AM
Anyone playing behind our offensive line would be injury prone. Brett Favre was known as an ironman before he landed behind our joke of a line. Then we went and cut McKinnie and made it even worse.

Caine
02-04-2012, 11:14 AM
Anyone playing behind our offensive line would be injury prone. Brett Favre was known as an ironman before he landed behind our joke of a line. Then we went and cut McKinnie and made it even worse.

Cutting McKinnie didn't make things worse, McKinnie got better after we cut him. He pulled his head out - briefly - but he'll slide back down again...wait and see.

Our situation was made worse by our inability to land a solid LT, or a solid RT, or a solid G, or find complimentary receivers, or find Secondary help. We signed a lot of place fillers, but no real talent.

Caine

12purplepride28
02-04-2012, 11:18 AM
I think RGIII would be an exciting pick, but what would we do with Ponder? He's only had 1 year and that is NEVER enough time to completely judge a QB. If he had 3 or 4 years under his belt and played like he did this year then yah, take RGIII but right now I'd much prefer to trade down to the Skins or Browns if he's still on the board and solidify our OL and D. I want to see some real offensive talent around Ponder before I jump off the bandwagon. I really think he can be a great QB if he just has some time to throw.

Freakout
02-04-2012, 02:54 PM
Cutting McKinnie didn't make things worse, McKinnie got better after we cut him. He pulled his head out - briefly - but he'll slide back down again...wait and see.

Our situation was made worse by our inability to land a solid LT, or a solid RT, or a solid G, or find complimentary receivers, or find Secondary help. We signed a lot of place fillers, but no real talent.

Caine

What crazy logic.

Cutting McKinnie led to us signing a worse player. It is that simple.

kevoncox
02-04-2012, 04:18 PM
What crazy logic.

Cutting McKinnie led to us signing a worse player. It is that simple.

Stop making excuses, their are teams with worst OLs and their QBs aren't getting knocked out.

Caine
02-04-2012, 05:09 PM
What crazy logic.

Cutting McKinnie led to us signing a worse player. It is that simple.

What should we have done? Continued to allow McKinnie to half-ass his way through another season? Continued to allow a guy who showed up GROSSLY overweight soak up cap space while underperforming? Or are you going to try and sell me on the notion that "Pro Bowl Left Tackle" Bryant McKinnie was a solid player in his last few seasons here?

We cut McKinnie because he was a worthless pile of goo who had underperformed season after season. His fat ass was on cruise control. We signed Charlie Johnson because he was all that was available in the 11th hour.

When McKinnie got picked up by Baltimore, I'm fairly certain that he was snapped back into the reality that he had to perform in order to keep his job. That lead to a return to better form...but Bryant, having demonstrated a proclivity towards laziness, will likely return to his slack-assed ways and become a blight on the Ravens O-Line...much like he was here.

So, that said, what options did we have? We could have kept the human turnstile....and our end result would have been the same. Or, we could have cut him and attempted to replace him...which we did. Which LT's did YOU think were better options?

Fact is, as bad as Johnson played, it wasn't far off from the level that McKinnie had been giving us. Will we seek to replace Johnson this season? I certainly hope so. But pointing to THIS as a reason for the Vikings failure is inaccurate. McKinnie brought this on himself. He left the team no choice. It's THAT simple.

Caine

Caine
02-04-2012, 05:15 PM
I think RGIII would be an exciting pick, but what would we do with Ponder? He's only had 1 year and that is NEVER enough time to completely judge a QB. If he had 3 or 4 years under his belt and played like he did this year then yah, take RGIII but right now I'd much prefer to trade down to the Skins or Browns if he's still on the board and solidify our OL and D. I want to see some real offensive talent around Ponder before I jump off the bandwagon. I really think he can be a great QB if he just has some time to throw.

What we do with Ponder is we create a QB competition between them....then we keep the better one and offer the other as trade bait. This can either work wonderfully (Like Flynn in GB or Kolb in Philly) or it can blow up in our face (Like Quinn and Anderson in Cleveland).

Chances are, however, that having 2 excellent prospects on our roster will result in us having a solid QB for the future.

That doesn't mean we don't need a new LT....we do....but I think that you build around a QB first. And if RGIII is can be better than Ponder, go get him.

Caine

midgensa
02-04-2012, 05:53 PM
I want badly to believe that we did the right thing on selecting this guy 12th overall I just have serious concerns on his ability to hold up. Look at his injuries in 3 consecutive years.

Junior year - Throwing Shoulder injury
Senior year - Elbow injuries
Rookie season - 3 different serious injuries including Hip, Concussion and Hip again.

I just don't know if this guy is capable of being the guy for 8 years or more.
Because of this I really want us to swallow our pride, take the media firestorm and draft Robert Griffin.
Capable of sub 4.4 speed, Rocket for an arm and compact throwing motion (except when deep), he is the best QB we will have a shot at for years. He is super intelligent, can read defenses and is very careful with the ball. Simply put he should be the #1 pick ahead of Luck but that bandwagon is out of control. Picture Vick, minus the off field drama, with the brain of an Oxford graduate, and the passing poise of Montana. This pick at #3 will define this franchise for another decade and we will be kicking ourselves if we mess this up. In a league driven by the passing game, why we seem to be ok with "good enough" as opposed to an excellent Qb, is beyond me. Other needs be damned, this kid was on team devoid of talent minus a 1st round WR and he lead them to a bowl game and bowl victory. Draft Griffin and trade Ponder for a 2nd or 3rd to the Bills, Skins, Cards, and or Browns.

I don't care what system you play in 4000+ yards throwing, 37tds and 6 ints, while completing 72% of his passes is obscene.

Baylor's Robert Griffin III: 2011 Heisman Trophy Winner & Most Exciting Player in the Country! - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO3QkCbt0ys&feature=related)

If you don't care what system someone plays and only care about numbers ... then why aren't we taking Kellen Moore No. 3? Numbers in college don't mean a damn thing ... that is why.

That said ... I would have no problem with taking RGIII.

kevoncox
02-04-2012, 05:59 PM
If you don't care what system someone plays and only care about numbers ... then why aren't we taking Kellen Moore No. 3? Numbers in college don't mean a damn thing ... that is why.

That said ... I would have no problem with taking RGIII.

You mistook my statement for saying nothing else matters like..... talent. Moore simply doesn't have the arm strength or talent to play in the pros. We are talking about elite talent here. So my statement about the system is more about comparing Luck to Griffin. His spread offense experience is used to discount his numbers which are gaudy.

Formo
02-04-2012, 06:18 PM
I'm completely ok with drafting Griffin. The kids a player, and he'll be a staple in the NFL for years to come.

That said, I'm not sure if Ponder is so much injury prone as he would be if he didn't get the David Carr treatment from our OLine. Kevon has a legit concern about his durability, though.

I'm in the same camp as the poster that said that he was ok with drafting any of the top 4 projected guys. We need help at WR, OL, DB, so any of the top players in those respective positions will be a plus (Blackmon, Kalil, either of the top CBs from LSU/Bama).

My main concern about this draft is the middle/late rounds were we seem to miss. Those are the rounds were good and great NFL teams use to fill out their depth with capable players that fit in the scheme, and I haven't seen any of that from the ToA.

Braddock
02-04-2012, 06:26 PM
Stop making excuses, their are teams with worst OLs and their QBs aren't getting knocked out.

Please, provide 1 example. Just 1.

kevoncox
02-04-2012, 07:19 PM
Please, provide 1 example. Just 1.
Wanted to say Seattle but Injury prove TJ missed some time for a cramped vagina
Raiders
Cowboys

marshallvike
02-04-2012, 11:34 PM
What crazy logic.

Cutting McKinnie led to us signing a worse player. It is that simple.

You have to cut out cancer, not just hope it will get better.

marshallvike
02-04-2012, 11:39 PM
I want badly to believe that we did the right thing on selecting this guy 12th overall I just have serious concerns on his ability to hold up. Look at his injuries in 3 consecutive years.

Junior year - Throwing Shoulder injury
Senior year - Elbow injuries
Rookie season - 3 different serious injuries including Hip, Concussion and Hip again.

I just don't know if this guy is capable of being the guy for 8 years or more.
Because of this I really want us to swallow our pride, take the media firestorm and draft Robert Griffin.
Capable of sub 4.4 speed, Rocket for an arm and compact throwing motion (except when deep), he is the best QB we will have a shot at for years. He is super intelligent, can read defenses and is very careful with the ball. Simply put he should be the #1 pick ahead of Luck but that bandwagon is out of control. Picture Vick, minus the off field drama, with the brain of an Oxford graduate, and the passing poise of Montana. This pick at #3 will define this franchise for another decade and we will be kicking ourselves if we mess this up. In a league driven by the passing game, why we seem to be ok with "good enough" as opposed to an excellent Qb, is beyond me. Other needs be damned, this kid was on team devoid of talent minus a 1st round WR and he lead them to a bowl game and bowl victory. Draft Griffin and trade Ponder for a 2nd or 3rd to the Bills, Skins, Cards, and or Browns.

I don't care what system you play in 4000+ yards throwing, 37tds and 6 ints, while completing 72% of his passes is obscene.

Baylor's Robert Griffin III: 2011 Heisman Trophy Winner & Most Exciting Player in the Country! - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO3QkCbt0ys&feature=related)

We sure as hell better draft him then. He is better than the sum of Montana and Vick, and smarter than Hawking. Let's hope Speilman realizes what a god RGIII is.

Johnson14
02-05-2012, 06:09 AM
It's not the durability of this kid that worries me, it's the lack of accuracy, touch and arm strength that worries the heck out of me!

And no, I don't want RGIII, that would be yet another mistake from our FO.

Marrdro
02-05-2012, 07:33 AM
Marr,
I don't think he has "it". I simply get the career backup feeling of dread from him. He lacks the arm strength to throw the 15 yard out, 18 yard comeback, and almost anything on the wide side of the field. His arm is adequate at best. You can't be groomed to win if you can't stay on the field. He isn't learning to take a beating, he i getting knocked out of games. I will like to point out that all the grooming in the world made Sanchez an average QB. When a guy doesn't have "it", you are wasting your time.

The possible combanation of Harvin, Peterson and Robert Griffen III, has me drooling. When you start doing your research, I think you will change your tune. What I saw from this guy is it. He does everything you want from a leader at the QB position.
You can tell he doesn't have IT after one season?

Here's a question (string of em)....Does Sanchez have IT? Does Ryan have IT?, Does Flacco have IT? Does Bradford have IT? Does Stafford have it? How about Tebow? He has IT, but what will it do for the team?

Truth of the matter is, all of those QB's flashed and have steadily declined or atleast peaked after many more games than young Ponder.

Give him a few years and quit looking for the "Instant success" you are looking for because no matter what, it takes time to find out if he has "IT". Just ask the Giants fans who were still willing to give up on Eli going into his 5th year.

On a side note, sure he has limitations on his arm strength, but the bigger question is, .....Why ohhhhh why did the staff that drafted him not develop a offensive scheme that best suites the QB they drafted?

Go back in time. Look at the style of WCO coach Walsh ran pre-Montanna. He basically changed it to the style that a kid like Ponder can be successful in. Same applies for when Young took over. Another variant was born. If Musgrove is what everyone on here thought he was going to be (except me of course) then why is he making the kid make throws to tightly covered receivers (alot) when the kid can't make that throw?

I think he has it. If I'm not mistaken he was the highest rated QB on 3rd down passing conversions and alot of them were long distance situations. That is one stat that shows to me that he has IT. Get the kid 2 more receivers and I think you will agree unless your like Caine and will refuse to see the QB talent........snicker.......:haha:

Marrdro
02-05-2012, 07:36 AM
It's not the durability of this kid that worries me, it's the lack of accuracy, touch and arm strength that worries the heck out of me!

And no, I don't want RGIII, that would be yet another mistake from our FO.
You don't finish with as high of a rate on 3rd down conversions than he did (especially with that WR crew) if your not accurate my friend. Additionally, I'm not sure what you were watching when it came to touch. Kid made some fantastic throws to spots that WR's should have been at.

As I told our good friend Kev. Get him a couple of WR's like Vjax and Blackmon and we won't be having this discussion.

Marrdro
02-05-2012, 07:38 AM
Wanted to say Seattle but Injury prove TJ missed some time for a cramped vagina
Raiders
Cowboys
He missed very little time and it was with a torn peck that he played most of the season with. Team was ranked in the high teens, low 20's in passing and that torn peck was compounded by Baldwin and Tate being his only reliable receivers.

Ponder will be fine. We just need to have faith, patience and a O-coord who isn't a lunatic running the show.

Bunched sets. Gimme a break.

Marrdro
02-05-2012, 07:44 AM
My main concern about this draft is the middle/late rounds were we seem to miss. Those are the rounds were good and great NFL teams use to fill out their depth with capable players that fit in the scheme, and I haven't seen any of that from the ToA.
I still "Ponder" why people say this organization misses on players in the middle rounds. Take our averages and bounce them against teams (we tried this once before) that are "Perceived" to be "Great" at drafting and then get back to me on the vast number that we missed on my friend.

DraftHistory.com (http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/teams/vikings)

Marrdro
02-05-2012, 07:48 AM
I think RGIII would be an exciting pick, but what would we do with Ponder? He's only had 1 year and that is NEVER enough time to completely judge a QB. If he had 3 or 4 years under his belt and played like he did this year then yah, take RGIII but right now I'd much prefer to trade down to the Skins or Browns if he's still on the board and solidify our OL and D. I want to see some real offensive talent around Ponder before I jump off the bandwagon. I really think he can be a great QB if he just has some time to throw.
What would we then do in 2013 when RGIII has struggled a bit? Kick him to the curb without trying to develop him over a period of time longer than a sneeze as well, because he struggled.

Comeon my friend. You have to give the kid some time and that time has to include having put some weapons around him.

You just can't keep plugging in a QB each and every year in the hopes that one of them will be an instant wonder. It just doesn't happen that way.

MaxVike
02-05-2012, 08:05 AM
Completely agree Marr. Give the kid we have some WRs and a decent OL...and, let's see what he's got.

Marrdro
02-05-2012, 08:28 AM
Completely agree Marr. Give the kid we have some WRs and a decent OL...and, let's see what he's got.
I'm really hoping they don't opt to get a rook at LT. I don't think this staff has a clue on how to develop OLmen. Load is my reason for that assumption. That and how confused Hutch seemed to be this year.

I'm hoping the go with signing Jared Gaither from the Chargers. When he stepped in at LT the Chargers were like a different team. Get him and VJax as your two key FA's, and then draft defense accordingly.

Johnson14
02-05-2012, 09:15 AM
You don't finish with as high of a rate on 3rd down conversions than he did (especially with that WR crew) if your not accurate my friend. Additionally, I'm not sure what you were watching when it came to touch. Kid made some fantastic throws to spots that WR's should have been at.

As I told our good friend Kev. Get him a couple of WR's like Vjax and Blackmon and we won't be having this discussion.

He had one solid WR in Jenkins, and one beast in Harvin and a solid TE in Shianc.. so its not like he had no receivers dude so i don't buy that as an excuse.

He missed way to many wide open receivers and threw in sound ground balls DNabb would have been proud of.

I would love Blackmon in our WR corps though, he looks a true beast.

Caine
02-05-2012, 09:37 AM
Please be clear, I'm not writing off Ponder...While I'm not betting the house that he's the next best thing to canned beer, I also think he needs time.

But RGIII is an impressive player. And we may have an opportunity to land him. And, no disrespect to Ponder, when the opportunity to upgrade that position comes along, you take it. ESPECIALLY when we're still in the "I don't know" stage.

Look, if we had an established top tier QB, I'd say draft someone else. But then, if we had an established top tier QB we likely wouldn't have the 3rd overall pick...

Fact is, we don't owe Ponder anything. We have to try and build the best team possible. If an AP clone were available, I'd take him too. This is about improving the team...and since Ponder is NOT locked in as our guy, there is no reason other than foolish optimism (Which allowed Jackson to stick around for 5 years) to not improve at the QB position.

That said, if Luck and RGIII go 1 and 2 as some have projected, I'm not really heartbroken. LT and WR are big needs for us too. But if we have a chance to significantly upgrade any KEY position...take it.

Caine

Johnson14
02-05-2012, 09:55 AM
Rams pick 2 and no way they take RGIII or trade that pick away as they need WR/OL help, as much, if not more than us.. and Id take Bradford over RGIII every time.

YouthVikesFan
02-05-2012, 11:16 AM
First off hey everybody, long time reader new poster here. My opinions on taking RGIII with the 3rd overall is different than most here. Yes hes an exciting player but we have two young great prospects who just needs time to develop and players around them to show their true skills. Ponder did indeed struggle down the stretch but his first few games were pretty good and having us fans believing we found our starter for years to come. Give him time to calm down and not try to repeat his early success.. he'll learn to just play football. the kid is smart.
Dont forget about JW who played good enough filling in almost everytime he gets in the game, the guy is a true athlete. With all that said RGIII is an upgrade of what we have but look at the pick we have.. If ponder was a 3rd overall pick then we could compare the two. We have an higher overall pick and it would be a waste to draft two QBs in the first round when ponder doesnt completly suck. Lets settle for less with ponder and build around him.

Caine
02-05-2012, 04:18 PM
First off hey everybody, long time reader new poster here. My opinions on taking RGIII with the 3rd overall is different than most here. Yes hes an exciting player but we have two young great prospects who just needs time to develop and players around them to show their true skills. Ponder did indeed struggle down the stretch but his first few games were pretty good and having us fans believing we found our starter for years to come. Give him time to calm down and not try to repeat his early success.. he'll learn to just play football. the kid is smart.
Dont forget about JW who played good enough filling in almost everytime he gets in the game, the guy is a true athlete. With all that said RGIII is an upgrade of what we have but look at the pick we have.. If ponder was a 3rd overall pick then we could compare the two. We have an higher overall pick and it would be a waste to draft two QBs in the first round when ponder doesnt completly suck. Lets settle for less with ponder and build around him.

First, welcome.

Second, I take issue with two of your statements:

A: "...RGIII is an upgrade of what we have...".
B: "Lets settle for less with ponder and build around him."

Why, if a player is better, do you not take him? And, in the same vein, why would you EVER settle for less? Show me a championship team that, "Settled for less". And, isn't that our goal? Aren't we supposed to be trying to win championships?

If our goal were to show absurd loyalty to Players who are making millions of dollars, then you'd be right.

But we're trying to build a championship team. And to do so, we need to maximize our key positions. And if RGIII is an upgrade over Ponder, then why, in the name of all we hold dear, would we sit back and try and do more with less?

I believe that Ponder MIGHT become a viable starter in this league...but he has a long way to go, and didn't show as much as I'd hoped for early.

I believe that Webb is a gifted athlete, but I don't know if we've seen enough to warrant making him a legit project.

But all reports are that RGIII is the real deal. I haven't heard any serious knocks on the kid. And if you get a shot to land a legit franchise guy at QB, you do it.

Caine

marshallvike
02-05-2012, 07:43 PM
I'm really hoping they don't opt to get a rook at LT. I don't think this staff has a clue on how to develop OLmen. Load is my reason for that assumption. That and how confused Hutch seemed to be this year.

I'm hoping the go with signing Jared Gaither from the Chargers. When he stepped in at LT the Chargers were like a different team. Get him and VJax as your two key FA's, and then draft defense accordingly.


Ok marr, once again you want to deny me the 1st round offensive lineman I have been hoping for for years. We may be able to sign a free agent, but it seems everyone thinks Kalil is the real deal. I would rather take him and have a top LT for years to come, which also frees up Cj to move inside where he is much more effective. There is also a good chance this staff does not last past this year, so we may get a staff that can develope players. Consider this, if they can fudge up Hutch, what makes you think they will not do the same thing to any free agent lineman they sign?
We need to take OLine first. It is going to be at least a two year process top get this team back to respectability anyway. Start with the line.
On a side note, it is good to see you were posting today. I thought we may have lost you.

YouthVikesFan
02-06-2012, 02:19 PM
First, welcome.

Second, I take issue with two of your statements:

A: "...RGIII is an upgrade of what we have...".
B: "Lets settle for less with ponder and build around him."

Why, if a player is better, do you not take him? And, in the same vein, why would you EVER settle for less? Show me a championship team that, "Settled for less". And, isn't that our goal? Aren't we supposed to be trying to win championships?

If our goal were to show absurd loyalty to Players who are making millions of dollars, then you'd be right.

But we're trying to build a championship team. And to do so, we need to maximize our key positions. And if RGIII is an upgrade over Ponder, then why, in the name of all we hold dear, would we sit back and try and do more with less?

I believe that Ponder MIGHT become a viable starter in this league...but he has a long way to go, and didn't show as much as I'd hoped for early.

I believe that Webb is a gifted athlete, but I don't know if we've seen enough to warrant making him a legit project.

But all reports are that RGIII is the real deal. I haven't heard any serious knocks on the kid. And if you get a shot to land a legit franchise guy at QB, you do it.

Caine

I agree, but are we not in the rebuilding stages? You have to upgrade in your worst areas before you get better in the solid places. Like you said ponder may can be a franchise player one day, its too early to tell.. why not take a OL WR CB where we are terrible at and if ponder doesnt show improvement in the next 3 years im sure we will be in position to take another top prospect. If we were a QB away and ponder looked like Gabbert his rookie season i would be all in for taking RGIII. Plus we need a vetern at QB to show and teach our two young QBs who have potiental. If we take RGIII our vetern will be Joe webb? a sixth round QB/WR. Get a vet and groom our young guys.. lets see how it pans out.

Traveling_Vike
02-06-2012, 02:42 PM
I won't cry if we end up with RGIII but I do not believe he's the right pick at this time. We simply have too many other much more glaring needs to see to.

We took a QB in the first last year. Regardless of what he did for us, going the same way this year states loudly and clearly that we wasted that pick last time and are a bunch of idiots. It says we are stepping back another year because we screwed up and have to take a "do-over."

For the same reason, coming from the opposite side of the equation, that is exactly why we MUST take either Kalil or Blackmon. These two spots are glaring needs which must be filled immediately or it again sets us back another year. Claiborne also fits this, to a slightly lesser degree.

I say take Kalil and let him learn the NFL game starting RIGHT NOW. Staff concerns don't worry me that much; only his position coach will have any real impact in his first year. If we wait, there are no guarantees we will land a competent FA and then where will we be? RIght back in the same mess again.

The argument that you take an upgrade when you can get one only holds water if there's only one obvious position at which this can occur. We have many. ANY of these guys would be almost guaranteed as an immediate and significant upgrade. The QB position has the smallest gap, IMO, among them, therefore should be the last concern, not the first.

Staying with Ponder is also not in any way, shape or form, "settling." He was a first round QB, and still has all the potential that he showed back then, along with a year of NFL experience under his belt. The so-called "injury-prone" thing is overblown, as our OL had more to do with that than Ponder himself did. And the second hip injury was a simple and obvious result of returning before he was truly healed from the first one.

Take Kalil or Blackmon. Better yet, trade down if we can and STILL get one of them. Address the defensive backfield in FA, and go HARD. Those are the building blocks we need for the future. Not another QB, no matter how good he looks.

tastywaves
02-06-2012, 03:38 PM
I won't cry if we end up with RGIII but I do not believe he's the right pick at this time. We simply have too many other much more glaring needs to see to.

We took a QB in the first last year. Regardless of what he did for us, going the same way this year states loudly and clearly that we wasted that pick last time and are a bunch of idiots. It says we are stepping back another year because we screwed up and have to take a "do-over."

For the same reason, coming from the opposite side of the equation, that is exactly why we MUST take either Kalil or Blackmon. These two spots are glaring needs which must be filled immediately or it again sets us back another year. Claiborne also fits this, to a slightly lesser degree.

I say take Kalil and let him learn the NFL game starting RIGHT NOW. Staff concerns don't worry me that much; only his position coach will have any real impact in his first year. If we wait, there are no guarantees we will land a competent FA and then where will we be? RIght back in the same mess again.

The argument that you take an upgrade when you can get one only holds water if there's only one obvious position at which this can occur. We have many. ANY of these guys would be almost guaranteed as an immediate and significant upgrade. The QB position has the smallest gap, IMO, among them, therefore should be the last concern, not the first.

Staying with Ponder is also not in any way, shape or form, "settling." He was a first round QB, and still has all the potential that he showed back then, along with a year of NFL experience under his belt. The so-called "injury-prone" thing is overblown, as our OL had more to do with that than Ponder himself did. And the second hip injury was a simple and obvious result of returning before he was truly healed from the first one.

Take Kalil or Blackmon. Better yet, trade down if we can and STILL get one of them. Address the defensive backfield in FA, and go HARD. Those are the building blocks we need for the future. Not another QB, no matter how good he looks.

What if Andrew Luck was available? Would you still pass? Many claim he is a once in a generation prospect.

I don't think we will take RGIII, but I would not be opposed to it if I felt that he was that special. That's the way the Vikings should be looking at it as well. At #3 we should be able to get a franchise player that will dominate their position for many years to come. If we fail to get that type of impact player, then we failed in our pick. I don't care if it is an OL, WR, CB or a QB. Of the candidates that I see as available to us, it looks like Kalil is the closest thing to that type of player, but a strong argument could also be made for RGIII. I don't think you can make that argument with Claiborne or Blackmon.

Caine
02-06-2012, 04:05 PM
I won't cry if we end up with RGIII but I do not believe he's the right pick at this time. We simply have too many other much more glaring needs to see to.

We took a QB in the first last year. Regardless of what he did for us, going the same way this year states loudly and clearly that we wasted that pick last time and are a bunch of idiots. It says we are stepping back another year because we screwed up and have to take a "do-over."

For the same reason, coming from the opposite side of the equation, that is exactly why we MUST take either Kalil or Blackmon. These two spots are glaring needs which must be filled immediately or it again sets us back another year. Claiborne also fits this, to a slightly lesser degree.

I say take Kalil and let him learn the NFL game starting RIGHT NOW. Staff concerns don't worry me that much; only his position coach will have any real impact in his first year. If we wait, there are no guarantees we will land a competent FA and then where will we be? RIght back in the same mess again.

The argument that you take an upgrade when you can get one only holds water if there's only one obvious position at which this can occur. We have many. ANY of these guys would be almost guaranteed as an immediate and significant upgrade. The QB position has the smallest gap, IMO, among them, therefore should be the last concern, not the first.

Staying with Ponder is also not in any way, shape or form, "settling." He was a first round QB, and still has all the potential that he showed back then, along with a year of NFL experience under his belt. The so-called "injury-prone" thing is overblown, as our OL had more to do with that than Ponder himself did. And the second hip injury was a simple and obvious result of returning before he was truly healed from the first one.

Take Kalil or Blackmon. Better yet, trade down if we can and STILL get one of them. Address the defensive backfield in FA, and go HARD. Those are the building blocks we need for the future. Not another QB, no matter how good he looks.

When you say Ponder is a 1st round QB....what exactly does that mean? Jackson was a 2nd round QB. Brady was a 6th round QB. Whom would you rather have?

Ponder has potential...but has a ways to go before we start proclaiming him our franchise guy. Not that he can't get there - he's only had 1 season - but my POINT is that he isn't "carved in stone" as a franchise QB.

IMO, QB is the single most important position on the field. When you have the opportunity to land a guy who is projected to be a lock as a franchise guy - and that's what I'm reading about RGIII - you do it. Best case scenario is that Ponder and RGIII both turn into money, worst case is both flop. But that gives us great odds on having a great QB.

Do we NEED other positions? Oh hell yes. And if RGIII is off the board at #2 I won't cry. If someone is willing to pay huge to move up to #3, I'd also consider that depending upon compensation and how far we fall.

But, if we're staying at #3, and RGIII is available, I don't think it's a bad move to draft him.

Caine

Ltrey33
02-06-2012, 07:44 PM
Marr,
I don't think he has "it". I simply get the career backup feeling of dread from him. He lacks the arm strength to throw the 15 yard out, 18 yard comeback, and almost anything on the wide side of the field. His arm is adequate at best. You can't be groomed to win if you can't stay on the field. He isn't learning to take a beating, he i getting knocked out of games. I will like to point out that all the grooming in the world made Sanchez an average QB. When a guy doesn't have "it", you are wasting your time.

The possible combanation of Harvin, Peterson and Robert Griffen III, has me drooling. When you start doing your research, I think you will change your tune. What I saw from this guy is it. He does everything you want from a leader at the QB position.

Holy shit. Trent Dilfer, is that you?

seaniemck7
02-06-2012, 11:09 PM
The idea of taking RGIII is intriguing, no doubt. But even if we had the first pick, with both Luck and RGIII are on the board, I would bet dollars to donuts Speilman wouldn't draft either of them. Ponder was his pick, and I don't think there is any way he picks a QB in the first round that essentially admits he made a mistake.

The best we can hope for is Khalil. Elite LTs don't grow on trees. He would immediatly upgrade two positions because we can move Johnson to the inside. Taking a QB or WR only upgrades one position. CB is the only other position where we would get a double upgrade, but CBs aren't usually taken in the first 3 picks.

Bottom line is Khalil, at the third pick, gives us the most bang for our buck. It may not be sexy, its better looking than the horror show that has been our LT position ever since McKinnie decided that record labels were more important than not being a fat lazy ass.

TheAnimal93
02-06-2012, 11:11 PM
What is the one thing that almost ALL rookie QB's say about what impresses them about the NFL in their first year? The speed of the game. That factor with the lack of a strong O-line it is no surprise to me the outcome of last season.
That being said does anyone think that RGIII will not struggle? The teams that this kid played against were not the most elite of teams making it easier to be impressive. Not taking away anything from hiim, HE IS AMAZING. But that is not to say that Ponder can't or won't be a SB winner. Remember the QB will only be as good as the team around him. Not that the QB cannot make players around him better, but just having an good or great or elite QB alone will not get you to the promised land. So, we have already invested in Ponder, lets give him a fighting chance and surround this kid with some players that will be there with him for the long haul. Whether that be Kalil, Claiborne or Blackmon, or trading down and doing the same. Vikings have to do very well this offseason to have any hope of being a contender in the near future.
Sidenote: Look at Bradford, talk about labeling someone injury prone...

MindCrimes67
02-06-2012, 11:18 PM
Ok first off.. Taking RGIII would be a dumb pick. Top reason being we just used a first rd pick on Ponder. Next, you show me one qb who would not have been injured with our pathetic OL. In my 30+ yrs of watching and rooting for vikes. It was by far the worst OL we have ever had.. How many times did we see our RBs get hit just as getting ball handed to them. Or Ponder getting hit before he even got set. Also how many one year wonder college qbs have we seen get drafted high and then flop. RG III may turn out to be good, but under no circumstance do we draft him.. To be ready to give up on Ponder already would be a real dumbass thing to do.. And to say he is injury prone, is premature. I liked what i saw from Ponder up until the point of where he kept getting crap knocked out of him. He then started playin with hesitation.. No matter how you spin it, it wouldnt matter who our qb was, without a better OL they would be injured too. That is a fact.....

kevoncox
02-07-2012, 06:09 AM
Ok first off.. Taking RGIII would be a dumb pick. Top reason being we just used a first rd pick on Ponder. Next, you show me one qb who would not have been injured with our pathetic OL. In my 30+ yrs of watching and rooting for vikes. It was by far the worst OL we have ever had.. How many times did we see our RBs get hit just as getting ball handed to them. Or Ponder getting hit before he even got set. Also how many one year wonder college qbs have we seen get drafted high and then flop. RG III may turn out to be good, but under no circumstance do we draft him.. To be ready to give up on Ponder already would be a real dumbass thing to do.. And to say he is injury prone, is premature. I liked what i saw from Ponder up until the point of where he kept getting crap knocked out of him. He then started playin with hesitation.. No matter how you spin it, it wouldnt matter who our qb was, without a better OL they would be injured too. That is a fact.....

People that use your type of knowledge are what we call optimist. I don't care where the guy was drafted. You draft the best players you can. Did the Panthers say that they couldn't give up on Clausen because he was drafted the year before with a 2nd round pick? Should they have passed on Cam? Looks like they have themselves a winner to me. In yoru train of thought, they would have skipped Cam and drafted an OL to make Clausen look better.

The fact remains that we drafted an Average Qb number 12 overall. That doesn't make him an elite QB. In this years draft he might be the 4th QB selected. Elite players tend not to be the 4th best player at their position. Also QB is the most important position on the field. You need to damn sure make sure you do it right and have an elite talent if you want to win and win frequently. Ponder is about to get benched for Joe Webb. Write it down. He loses his starting job to Webb.

kevoncox
02-07-2012, 06:12 AM
What is the one thing that almost ALL rookie QB's say about what impresses them about the NFL in their first year? The speed of the game. That factor with the lack of a strong O-line it is no surprise to me the outcome of last season.
That being said does anyone think that RGIII will not struggle? The teams that this kid played against were not the most elite of teams making it easier to be impressive. Not taking away anything from hiim, HE IS AMAZING. But that is not to say that Ponder can't or won't be a SB winner. Remember the QB will only be as good as the team around him. Not that the QB cannot make players around him better, but just having an good or great or elite QB alone will not get you to the promised land. So, we have already invested in Ponder, lets give him a fighting chance and surround this kid with some players that will be there with him for the long haul. Whether that be Kalil, Claiborne or Blackmon, or trading down and doing the same. Vikings have to do very well this offseason to have any hope of being a contender in the near future.
Sidenote: Look at Bradford, talk about labeling someone injury prone...

Bradford has completed a 17 game NFL season.
Ponder played in 11 games and got knocked out of 3 of them. WTF are you talking about?

singersp
02-07-2012, 07:22 AM
Ponder played in 11 games and got knocked out of 3 of them.

He can't stay healthy for 1 season, yet people say he needs more time? Now it's acceptable?

He led us to 0 wins in 11 games (He's accredited for 2 wins, but 1 came as a result of a missed FG, the other was won with Webb as QB) & fans still think he's our franchise QB?

Tends to contradict how they thought in the past.

Perhaps Dilfer (who has watched virtually every snap he took in college) wasn't spewing drivel after all & he and others did know what they were talking about.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for giving Ponder more time. I'm just surprised so many more fans have curbed their reasons for benching or wanting to get rid of QB's in the past.

After we sign Peyton to a 4 year deal, I wonder if they'll call Ponder a bust because he hasn't done anything in 5 years & failed to win the starting position?

That being said, if a better QB option comes along in the draft at #3, you take it.

If not this year, then next. My gut feeling tells me with Spielman as our GM, were going to have more opportunities for top 10 picks in the draft.

jargomcfargo
02-07-2012, 11:11 AM
People that use your type of knowledge are what we call optimist. I don't care where the guy was drafted. You draft the best players you can. Did the Panthers say that they couldn't give up on Clausen because he was drafted the year before with a 2nd round pick? Should they have passed on Cam? Looks like they have themselves a winner to me. In yoru train of thought, they would have skipped Cam and drafted an OL to make Clausen look better.

The fact remains that we drafted an Average Qb number 12 overall. That doesn't make him an elite QB. In this years draft he might be the 4th QB selected. Elite players tend not to be the 4th best player at their position. Also QB is the most important position on the field. You need to damn sure make sure you do it right and have an elite talent if you want to win and win frequently. Ponder is about to get benched for Joe Webb. Write it down. He loses his starting job to Webb.
Two comments:
1- It is rare to have such a high pick in this organization. Every other year the Vikings needed a quarterback but didn't have an early enough pick to get an elite player. Will this rare opportunity be squandered?

2- I'm in the camp that believes Webb will take the job from Ponder if he can't stay healthy.
Webb seems to be getting better despite very limited playing time. His passing is improving and he doesn't get sacked as much as Ponder despite poor protection.
Right now Webb seems to be at least as good as Ponder!

Flidais
02-07-2012, 11:49 AM
Bradford has completed a 17 game NFL season.
Ponder played in 11 games and got knocked out of 3 of them. WTF are you talking about?
Well, shucks, when did they sneak in that extra game a season? And I thought it was two games in the offing this summer...

I believe what TheAnimal93 was pointing out is that coming out of college, Sam Bradford had a lot of questions concerning his surgically repaired shoulder, and he did complete his first 16 game season his rookie year. However, he "regressed" his second year by only playing 10.

And what about the injury prone Matthew Stafford? There are many, including myself, who were calling Stafford, who played 10 games and 3 games his first two years respectively, a wasted draft pick. Now, after his first 16 game, 5,000 yard season, I'm eating a little crow. Are you saying that, knowing what we know now, the Lions should have kicked Stafford to the curb after his rookie year?

I'm not sure Ponder is anyone's future. But to dismiss the kid as injury-prone after his first and only pro year is a tad short-sighted.

Jarlvik
02-07-2012, 01:51 PM
People that use your type of knowledge are what we call optimist. I don't care where the guy was drafted. You draft the best players you can. Did the Panthers say that they couldn't give up on Clausen because he was drafted the year before with a 2nd round pick? Should they have passed on Cam? Looks like they have themselves a winner to me. In yoru train of thought, they would have skipped Cam and drafted an OL to make Clausen look better.

The fact remains that we drafted an Average Qb number 12 overall. That doesn't make him an elite QB. In this years draft he might be the 4th QB selected. Elite players tend not to be the 4th best player at their position. Also QB is the most important position on the field. You need to damn sure make sure you do it right and have an elite talent if you want to win and win frequently. Ponder is about to get benched for Joe Webb. Write it down. He loses his starting job to Webb.
The Clausen/ Newton scenario is the closest thing to what we have here. This is a very tough situation and I fully expect it dominate the Forums until Draft Day.
I really don't know if we can pass on RG3. Can't pass on Kalill, Blackmon, Claiborne. I think it would really be hard to mess up this draft, but...

TheAnimal93
02-07-2012, 01:53 PM
Well, shucks, when did they sneak in that extra game a season? And I thought it was two games in the offing this summer...

I believe what TheAnimal93 was pointing out is that coming out of college, Sam Bradford had a lot of questions concerning his surgically repaired shoulder, and he did complete his first 16 game season his rookie year. However, he "regressed" his second year by only playing 10.

And what about the injury prone Matthew Stafford? There are many, including myself, who were calling Stafford, who played 10 games and 3 games his first two years respectively, a wasted draft pick. Now, after his first 16 game, 5,000 yard season, I'm eating a little crow. Are you saying that, knowing what we know now, the Lions should have kicked Stafford to the curb after his rookie year?

I'm not sure Ponder is anyone's future. But to dismiss the kid as injury-prone after his first and only pro year is a tad short-sighted.

Yes Flidias, exactly the point I was making, thought that factoid was common knowledge so I did not elaborate. yes, Stafford as well.

Joe Webb may take away the starting role from Ponder, but not from lackluster play from Ponder. Ponder will have the whole offseason to improve his game and I expect him to do alot better than this year, if the O-line can keep him from getting his ass kicked on every pass play. Same goes for Webb. I expect him to improve as well and it could be a damn good dogfight in training camp and that will only help the Vikings.
If the Vikings stink again this year Ponder will get most of the blame, and maybe rightfully so. But I doubt it will be rest solely on his shoulders, unless we hit like 5 homeruns in the draft/FA and have all the holes plugged and shored up. lol

i_bleed_purple
02-07-2012, 04:13 PM
The Clausen/ Newton scenario is the closest thing to what we have here. This is a very tough situation and I fully expect it dominate the Forums until Draft Day.
I really don't know if we can pass on RG3. Can't pass on Kalill, Blackmon, Claiborne. I think it would really be hard to mess up this draft, but...

Knowing Speilman, we'll trade down to mid-1st, get an extra second and third, screw those up and wind up with one backup five years from now.

thorshammer
02-07-2012, 06:23 PM
I think we're ok at QB with Ponder and Webb. Let's get some O-Line and secondary help before we take another QB. With the O-Line we had last season I don't think Ponder and Webb did that bad .... they can both still walk ..... it's a miracle.

kevoncox
02-08-2012, 05:55 PM
Well, shucks, when did they sneak in that extra game a season? And I thought it was two games in the offing this summer...

I believe what TheAnimal93 was pointing out is that coming out of college, Sam Bradford had a lot of questions concerning his surgically repaired shoulder, and he did complete his first 16 game season his rookie year. However, he "regressed" his second year by only playing 10.

And what about the injury prone Matthew Stafford? There are many, including myself, who were calling Stafford, who played 10 games and 3 games his first two years respectively, a wasted draft pick. Now, after his first 16 game, 5,000 yard season, I'm eating a little crow. Are you saying that, knowing what we know now, the Lions should have kicked Stafford to the curb after his rookie year?

I'm not sure Ponder is anyone's future. But to dismiss the kid as injury-prone after his first and only pro year is a tad short-sighted.

Clearly 17 is a type. Thank you for not only focusing on that.
Your connection to Bradford is not accurate. Bradford was not considered injury prone. He was injured and people were worried about that injury. There is a difference between injury prone and injured. Ponder was/is considered injury prone. He had multiple injuries in college including elbow and throwin shoulder injuries. He comes to the pros and suffered hip and concussion injuries.

Stafford was not considered injury prone coming out of college. He suffered season ending injuries his first two years. Please believe if he only played 5 games this season the lions would start looking for other options.

Ponder has suffered 3 consecutive seasons of injuries. None of the Qbs you listed have done that. I have no doubt that he will get knocked out next season ( game 3) and Webb will take over and the Qb controversy will begin. You do not want a Qb that is injury prone. He is your leader on the field. Can't lead from the bench (Hi Peyton). I say draft him Griffin and trade Ponder for a 2nd rounder.

kevoncox
02-08-2012, 05:56 PM
Knowing Speilman, we'll trade down to mid-1st, get an extra second and third, screw those up and wind up with one backup five years from now.

You forget trading within our division to give them Blackmon and having him dominate us.

kevoncox
02-08-2012, 05:59 PM
Yes Flidias, exactly the point I was making, thought that factoid was common knowledge so I did not elaborate. yes, Stafford as well.

Joe Webb may take away the starting role from Ponder, but not from lackluster play from Ponder. Ponder will have the whole offseason to improve his game and I expect him to do alot better than this year, if the O-line can keep him from getting his ass kicked on every pass play. Same goes for Webb. I expect him to improve as well and it could be a damn good dogfight in training camp and that will only help the Vikings.
If the Vikings stink again this year Ponder will get most of the blame, and maybe rightfully so. But I doubt it will be rest solely on his shoulders, unless we hit like 5 homeruns in the draft/FA and have all the holes plugged and shored up. lol

I hope you are right but I doubt it. The kid won't stay healthy. While I won't say I am never wrong about a talent, I know QB play. They kid is a career backup. He cannot throw the out route and come back. I believe atleast 3 of his picks came off of those route combinations. Can't win if you can't throw the out, back shoulder, or comeback.

kevoncox
02-08-2012, 06:04 PM
I think we're ok at QB with Ponder and Webb. Let's get some O-Line and secondary help before we take another QB. With the O-Line we had last season I don't think Ponder and Webb did that bad .... they can both still walk ..... it's a miracle. Why be Ok? Why not be great?

NDVikingFan66
02-08-2012, 08:03 PM
No doubt Ponder did fight some injuries this year. But it is not like he was a porcelain doll. He was hit, and hit by guys who were coming full speed.

I am not sure RG3 is the right answer, nor am i sure Ponder is the answer. I will however reserve the right to criticize any decision the team makes.

:)

i_bleed_purple
02-08-2012, 08:06 PM
Why be Ok? Why not be great?

there has not yet been a single one of these fast, running QB's who have come out and been great consistently, why believe RGIII will be any different?

kevoncox
02-08-2012, 10:22 PM
Because he is a past first Qb. He just so happens to have elite speed. I would argue that Cam had a great first season.
Speed has nothing to to with passing ability. Why can't people get past the need to think all athletic Qbs cannot pass the ball. Every scout will tell you this kid rather pass the ball than rush. He just happens to have track speed. People make comparisons to Vick but that's ridiculous. Vicks career passing totals at VT was 3100 yards. This guy did that this year alone in 10 games.

He is also incredible with the ball. Freshman year he threw 3 ints. This year 6. His average yard per throw is 10 yards which stop the completions due to short passes mythos.



there has not yet been a single one of these fast, running QB's who have come out and been great consistently, why believe RGIII will be any different?

tastywaves
02-09-2012, 10:02 AM
Because he is a past first Qb. He just so happens to have elite speed. I would argue that Cam had a great first season.
Speed has nothing to to with passing ability. Why can't people get past the need to think all athletic Qbs cannot pass the ball. Every scout will tell you this kid rather pass the ball than rush. He just happens to have track speed. People make comparisons to Vick but that's ridiculous. Vicks career passing totals at VT was 3100 yards. This guy did that this year alone in 10 games.

He is also incredible with the ball. Freshman year he threw 3 ints. This year 6. His average yard per throw is 10 yards which stop the completions due to short passes mythos.

Agreed. I watched a lot of RGIII games last year. He is not a "running qb". Like Kevon says, he just happens to be really fast and can be effective running the ball. He will be a pass first QB, maybe even moreso than Ponder was this year. In RGIII's early years though, I would not be surprised to see him run the ball a fair amount due to the learning curve of getting comfortable with the passing game in the NFL. This is a luxury with a guy like RGIII and may allow him to be productive earlier than other candidates.

I think his stock goes up even further after the combine as he should test well in anything he decides to showcase...arm, speed, wonderlic and personality.

I also think that the biggest downside with him is injuries, this may just be me, but his frame is not that stout. Whether running or getting slammed in the pocket, I would have concerns on his durability.

Flidais
02-09-2012, 11:30 AM
Clearly 17 is a type. Thank you for not only focusing on that.
Your connection to Bradford is not accurate. Bradford was not considered injury prone. He was injured and people were worried about that injury. There is a difference between injury prone and injured. Ponder was/is considered injury prone. He had multiple injuries in college including elbow and throwin shoulder injuries. He comes to the pros and suffered hip and concussion injuries.

Stafford was not considered injury prone coming out of college. He suffered season ending injuries his first two years. Please believe if he only played 5 games this season the lions would start looking for other options.

Ponder has suffered 3 consecutive seasons of injuries. None of the Qbs you listed have done that. I have no doubt that he will get knocked out next season ( game 3) and Webb will take over and the Qb controversy will begin. You do not want a Qb that is injury prone. He is your leader on the field. Can't lead from the bench (Hi Peyton). I say draft him Griffin and trade Ponder for a 2nd rounder.
1) You're very welcome.

2) Bradford: Bradford was TheAnimal93's example not really mine, but it still doesn't change the fact that Bradford played only 10 games in 2011.

3) Injured v. Injury Prone: I'm beginning to believe your definition of "Injury Prone" is simply going to be "Injury Prone = Christian Ponder", regardless of what the facts might be.

4) Stafford only played 10 games in 2009 due to injuries. That's season 1. Stafford only played 3 games in 2010, also due to injuries. That's season 2. Stafford played throughout the middle of the 2011 season with a broken finger. I totally believe Stafford when he says that the broken finger was not the cause of the interceptions that plagued those games, despite the fact that the interceptions dried back up after the finger was healed. ::roll eyes:: For those keeping track at home, that would be season 3. Exactly like Stafford, Ponder had season ending injuries in 2009 and 2010 and was troubled by injuries in 2011. Exactly

I have no doubt the Lions would be looking elsewhere if Stafford had not played the entire 2011 season. That's my point. Stafford was given two completely wasted seasons in the NFL. You want to crucify Ponder over a single NFL season during which he was not the even the starter until Week 7 (Again, for those keeping track at home, that means five games he did not see the field in favor of a veteran quarterback - which means not injured - and a sixth game in which he replaced said veteran quarterback out of a 16 game season).

If you don't like the kid, fine. Don't like him. But don't give me this crap about Matt Stafford not being injury prone while Ponder is.

Caine
02-09-2012, 04:39 PM
1) You're very welcome.

2) Bradford: Bradford was TheAnimal93's example not really mine, but it still doesn't change the fact that Bradford played only 10 games in 2011.

3) Injured v. Injury Prone: I'm beginning to believe your definition of "Injury Prone" is simply going to be "Injury Prone = Christian Ponder", regardless of what the facts might be.

4) Stafford only played 10 games in 2009 due to injuries. That's season 1. Stafford only played 3 games in 2010, also due to injuries. That's season 2. Stafford played throughout the middle of the 2011 season with a broken finger. I totally believe Stafford when he says that the broken finger was not the cause of the interceptions that plagued those games, despite the fact that the interceptions dried back up after the finger was healed. ::roll eyes:: For those keeping track at home, that would be season 3. Exactly like Stafford, Ponder had season ending injuries in 2009 and 2010 and was troubled by injuries in 2011. Exactly

I have no doubt the Lions would be looking elsewhere if Stafford had not played the entire 2011 season. That's my point. Stafford was given two completely wasted seasons in the NFL. You want to crucify Ponder over a single NFL season during which he was not the even the starter until Week 7 (Again, for those keeping track at home, that means five games he did not see the field in favor of a veteran quarterback - which means not injured - and a sixth game in which he replaced said veteran quarterback out of a 16 game season).

If you don't like the kid, fine. Don't like him. But don't give me this crap about Matt Stafford not being injury prone while Ponder is.

I don't think anyone is crucifying Ponder. There are some very real concerns about him as a player....one of which is his durability, which he has not demonstrated. Another is his ability to lead the team to victory...something he's not been very good at. A third is his ability to put the ball in locations that lead to positive plays - something he's struggled with.

That said, everyone gets that he;s only had 1 season. No one expected him to be competing with Brady and Rodgers for the passing title this season.

But that doesn't change the fact that there are a lot of questions, and not a lot to make an informed decision with...pro or con.

That's why the possibility of drafting a QB like RGIII is going to make people take notice. Ponder hasn't locked anything down. If anything, he's opened the door for Webb. With that type of situation, how do you NOT take a look at what many are projecting as a true Franchise QB? You have to at least consider it.

As I said before, we owe Ponder nothing. If he wins the job, if he EARNS the job, it's his. But he hasn't done that yet. That means it's still up for grabs. And if that's true, then why limit your applicant pool? Unless you have some compelling reasons to believe that Ponder will ABSOLUTELY turn into "The Guy"...

Caine

kevoncox
02-09-2012, 06:41 PM
1) You're very welcome.

2) Bradford: Bradford was TheAnimal93's example not really mine, but it still doesn't change the fact that Bradford played only 10 games in 2011.

3) Injured v. Injury Prone: I'm beginning to believe your definition of "Injury Prone" is simply going to be "Injury Prone = Christian Ponder", regardless of what the facts might be.

4) Stafford only played 10 games in 2009 due to injuries. That's season 1. Stafford only played 3 games in 2010, also due to injuries. That's season 2. Stafford played throughout the middle of the 2011 season with a broken finger. I totally believe Stafford when he says that the broken finger was not the cause of the interceptions that plagued those games, despite the fact that the interceptions dried back up after the finger was healed. ::roll eyes:: For those keeping track at home, that would be season 3. Exactly like Stafford, Ponder had season ending injuries in 2009 and 2010 and was troubled by injuries in 2011. Exactly

I have no doubt the Lions would be looking elsewhere if Stafford had not played the entire 2011 season. That's my point. Stafford was given two completely wasted seasons in the NFL. You want to crucify Ponder over a single NFL season during which he was not the even the starter until Week 7 (Again, for those keeping track at home, that means five games he did not see the field in favor of a veteran quarterback - which means not injured - and a sixth game in which he replaced said veteran quarterback out of a 16 game season).

If you don't like the kid, fine. Don't like him. But don't give me this crap about Matt Stafford not being injury prone while Ponder is.
Again, you missed the point. Stafford was not labeled a injury prone coming out of college. He earned that moniker in his first 2 seasons. He also has a cannon for an arm, which can make people excuse the injuries.

Ponder EARNED an injury prone label coming out of college and injuries were a major concern. So far he has proven the concerns to be right. He may turn out to escape the bug and be fine. However it won't change the water pistol he has for an arm. He has too many marks against him for my liking. He may turn it all around. I'm just saying I would not past on a talent like griffin so see if he does.

BTW I like they guy and I have cheered for him. However, i know his limitations/

TheAnimal93
02-10-2012, 02:17 AM
Stafford and Bradford both WERE labeled questionable on their durability. Both with shoulder injuries. Whether or not they were labeled "injury prone", who cares. Both missed time while in college thus raising issues of their durablilty.

kevoncox
02-10-2012, 01:32 PM
Can you provide any information on where Stafford had question marks against him in college (injury related)
I agree that Bradford got injured and hurt his shoulder but before that he had no knocks on him. In fact he was expected to be #1 overall in the prior draft but decided to go back to college. Again we have a QB that was injured 1 season. That's not injury prone.

i_bleed_purple
02-10-2012, 08:38 PM
Because he is a past first Qb. He just so happens to have elite speed. I would argue that Cam had a great first season.
Speed has nothing to to with passing ability. Why can't people get past the need to think all athletic Qbs cannot pass the ball. Every scout will tell you this kid rather pass the ball than rush. He just happens to have track speed. People make comparisons to Vick but that's ridiculous. Vicks career passing totals at VT was 3100 yards. This guy did that this year alone in 10 games.

He is also incredible with the ball. Freshman year he threw 3 ints. This year 6. His average yard per throw is 10 yards which stop the completions due to short passes mythos.

And yet, college stats mean exactly dick in the NFL.

kevoncox
02-10-2012, 10:08 PM
And yet, college stats mean exactly dick in the NFL.
Yes because college ball is played on a round field and with a square ball. :(
College stats do not guaranteed success but to ignore them is foolish. When comparing prospects, college stats should be considered.
You are smarter than that Bleed!

TheAnimal93
02-11-2012, 08:52 AM
Can you provide any information on where Stafford had question marks against him in college (injury related)
I agree that Bradford got injured and hurt his shoulder but before that he had no knocks on him. In fact he was expected to be #1 overall in the prior draft but decided to go back to college. Again we have a QB that was injured 1 season. That's not injury prone.

Kevon, you are correct about Stafford. I was incorrect about him coming out of college. His issues were early in his NFL career. My timeline was askew.
BBAO: Stafford and the injury-prone label - NFC North Blog - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/19243/bbao-stafford-and-the-injury-prone-label)

battleaxe4cheese
02-11-2012, 10:07 AM
Injury prone? Huh?

I am shocked he wasn't dismembered after the atrocious play of the O-line this year. Injury prone?
He's tougher than nails as far as I'm concerned. He had about .4 seconds to get rid of the ball or run for his life...injury prone...some of you guys make me laugh.

For cripes sake he basically didn't even have a pocket to throw from for most of the games. He was being closed on by guys basically running full speed and he took some horrible shots. Give me a fricken brake. No quarterback would of survived in that environment for very long, and that's a fact.

I'm not saying he's the man, though I think he will be the answer eventually, but who in the hell can judge his toughness or lack there of after playing behind a line like that in only one year. Wow, talking about knee jerk.

MindCrimes67
02-11-2012, 12:00 PM
Injury prone? Huh?

I am shocked he wasn't dismembered after the atrocious play of the O-line this year. Injury prone?
He's tougher than nails as far as I'm concerned. He had about .4 seconds to get rid of the ball or run for his life...injury prone...some of you guys make me laugh.

For cripes sake he basically didn't even have a pocket to throw from for most of the games. He was being closed on by guys basically running full speed and he took some horrible shots. Give me a fricken brake. No quarterback would of survived in that environment for very long, and that's a fact.

I'm not saying he's the man, though I think he will be the answer eventually, but who in the hell can judge his toughness or lack there of after playing behind a line like that in only one year. Wow, talking about knee jerk.

Amen.. Preach it...

singersp
02-12-2012, 07:22 AM
Injury prone? Huh?

I am shocked he wasn't dismembered after the atrocious play of the O-line this year. Injury prone?
He's tougher than nails as far as I'm concerned. He had about .4 seconds to get rid of the ball or run for his life...injury prone...some of you guys make me laugh.

For cripes sake he basically didn't even have a pocket to throw from for most of the games. He was being closed on by guys basically running full speed and he took some horrible shots. Give me a fricken brake. No quarterback would of survived in that environment for very long, and that's a fact.

No QB? Does that include Favre, Jackson & Webb from a year ago?

Purple Floyd
02-12-2012, 10:05 AM
Yeah, that includes them.

When was the last time a QB lasted a season behind our OL? 2004?

battleaxe4cheese
02-12-2012, 12:28 PM
No QB? Does that include Favre, Jackson & Webb from a year ago?


You made my point.

battleaxe4cheese
02-12-2012, 12:58 PM
Last year was the worst oline I have seen out of any team since I started watching football. We are lucky Ponder is not a quadriplegic after last season.

TheAnimal93
02-12-2012, 04:55 PM
Last year was the worst oline I have seen out of any team since I started watching football. We are lucky Ponder is not a quadriplegic after last season.

Houston's may have been worse when David Carr got beat to a pulp for a couple of years. May have seemed longer to him. But point is well taken.

kevoncox
02-12-2012, 07:23 PM
Houston's may have been worse when David Carr got beat to a pulp for a couple of years. May have seemed longer to him. But point is well taken.

I don't think the OL is as bad as you guys did. I say plent of pockets and opputunities. However, the OL can only do so much when you have no WRS and they don't have to play you honestly. Teams are going to blitz and stack the box to stop AD. They are going to bring more than we can block and since out QB cannot throw them out of it...we saw more of it. Noticed when he started having some success, they backed off.

i_bleed_purple
02-12-2012, 08:33 PM
I don't think the OL is as bad as you guys did. I say plent of pockets and opputunities. However, the OL can only do so much when you have no WRS and they don't have to play you honestly. Teams are going to blitz and stack the box to stop AD. They are going to bring more than we can block and since out QB cannot throw them out of it...we saw more of it. Noticed when he started having some success, they backed off.

funny, I noticed when AP got hurt, they backed off, letting Gerhart run for respectable gains and still making Ponder look like crap/get hit all the time.

singersp
02-13-2012, 05:54 AM
Yeah, that includes them.

When was the last time a QB lasted a season behind our OL? 2004?

Yep, that was it. After Stringer died in 2002 & David Dixon retired in 2004 & our OL never achieved a high level of play.

I've been saying it for years. People seem to have forgotten how bad the OL was in 2005 & 2006, why we had to go get Hutch in the first place & why we've been trying, but failing to fix the RT position. McKinnie was good at run bocking at LT, but struggled at pass protection.

Our OL wasn't only bad last year once Ponder started, it was bad when McNabb started as well & mediocre at best since 2005.

2009 was an anomaly with Favre & AD making that line look better than it actually was. The NFCCG exposed them for what they were.

singersp
02-13-2012, 05:57 AM
Last year was the worst oline I have seen out of any team since I started watching football. We are lucky Ponder is not a quadriplegic after last season.

I guess you didn't see Seattle's OL play early in the season.

battleaxe4cheese
02-13-2012, 09:56 PM
Yep, that was it. After Stringer died in 2002 & David Dixon retired in 2004 & our OL never achieved a high level of play.

I've been saying it for years. People seem to have forgotten how bad the OL was in 2005 & 2006, why we had to go get Hutch in the first place & why we've been trying, but failing to fix the RT position. McKinnie was good at run bocking at LT, but struggled at pass protection.

Our OL wasn't only bad last year once Ponder started, it was bad when McNabb started as well & mediocre at best since 2005.

2009 was an anomaly with Favre & AD making that line look better than it actually was. The NFCCG exposed them for what they were.

Huh? How does AP make a line look better for just one year? Why didn't he make the line look better this year? All I saw was him running into the backs of our lineman who were getting manhandled like little girls. How many zero or one yard runs did he have this year before the injury? A lot. Also, what does the first part of the season for the sea chickens have to do with our entire 3-13 season of atrocious line play?

i_bleed_purple
02-13-2012, 11:51 PM
Huh? How does AP make a line look better for just one year? Why didn't he make the line look better this year? All I saw was him running into the backs of our lineman who were getting manhandled like little girls. How many zero or one yard runs did he have this year before the injury? A lot. Also, what does the first part of the season for the sea chickens have to do with our entire 3-13 season of atrocious line play?

because AP runs like a man posessed. Whenever you see a great RB, people automatically assume he has a great line. The opposite is true.

And Favre had the ability to make the line look MUCH better than it really was.

singersp
02-14-2012, 06:39 AM
Huh? How does AP make a line look better for just one year? Why didn't he make the line look better this year? All I saw was him running into the backs of our lineman who were getting manhandled like little girls. How many zero or one yard runs did he have this year before the injury? A lot. Also, what does the first part of the season for the sea chickens have to do with our entire 3-13 season of atrocious line play?

In 2009, it was a combination of Favre & AD making the OL look good. AD ran for almost 1400 yards & Favre passed for over 4,200 yards despite getting sacked 34 times. That combination of Favre's saavy & AD's shear power along with the 12 wins, gave the false appearance that our OL played great.

The OL did play pretty good when run blocking in 2009, but that by itself doesn't mean you have a good OL.

As 2010 & 2011 showed, our poor pass blocking OL got exposed when our QB's struggled. Yes I realize Favre played in 2010 also, but he was not in the same shape both mentally & physically that he was in 2009.

Last season, part of the reason AD didn't have as much success was due to a downgrade in our run blocking game. While McKinnie sucked at pass blocking, he did provide decent run blocking whereas Johnson was just a mediocre T filling the vacancy for a year. Also there was no respect for our passing game & a huge focus was put on stopping AD.

I completely agree with you on AD's runs for zero gain or a loss. I've mentioned that several times here, but that was not unique to last year. He's been doing that since he was a rookie.

What does the first part of the season for the sea chickens have to do with our entire 3-13 season of atrocious line play? That's simple. You stated "Last year was the worst oline I have seen out of any team since I started watching football."

"out of any team" to me suggests you're talking about any of the 32 teams in the NFL, not just the Vikings. With that said, I replied, "I guess you didn't see Seattle's OL play early in the season."

Their OL, especially early in the season, played worse than ours did.

i_bleed_purple
02-14-2012, 08:20 PM
Their OL, especially early in the season, played worse than ours did.

Except theirs improved (as they got more experience playing together), while ours did the opposite.

singersp
02-15-2012, 05:44 AM
Except theirs improved (as they got more experience playing together), while ours did the opposite.

I've got to wonder exactly how much of our OL woes are directly related to the coaches. You can blame the players up to a point, but when you see little or no improvement at all ever since Childress became coach in 2006, you have to point the finger at coaching as well.

Frazier made Davidson our new OL coach a year ago, but I certainly can't see his impact yet.

Purple Floyd
02-15-2012, 07:25 AM
I agree with Singer to a point. Any line should see improvement over an 8 game stretch let alone 5-6 years and ours has been plagued by the same core problems through all of the roster and coaching changes which leads me to believe it can be certainly pinned on coaching, but then again it could also be a schematic problem as well as the FO not putting the right talent in place.

I believe it is a combination of all of them and that is a problem at the top where everything should be put together.

kevoncox
02-15-2012, 03:54 PM
You want a good OL get yourself a good Qb and running back. AD is a great back so teams play on the line. The reason the line looked better in 2009 is because Favre forced teams to back off. Teams could no longer play 1 on 1 on the outside. and put 1 or 2 safeties on the LOS.

We don't have the deep threat of Rice ( means no safety over the top)
We still have AP which means a saftey in the box and constant run blitzers.
Get us a good Qb that can make quick reads and a WR that can go up and get it, and we will see better Oline play.

Noticed that during the Jets and Pats game in 2010, our Oline looked great. We had just signed Randy and Farve had his deep threat again to play a saftey over the top ( this prevented a cover 3 look because the FS cannot play over the top and the middle of the field. We see more umbrella looks and less defensive players where the defenders are as close to the line. This gives the Oline more time to identify a blitzer before engaging them, which leads to better blitz pickups and therefore less blitzing.

singersp
02-16-2012, 06:55 AM
Noticed that during the Jets and Pats game in 2010, our Oline looked great. We had just signed Randy and Farve had his deep threat again to play a saftey over the top ( this prevented a cover 3 look because the FS cannot play over the top and the middle of the field.

What Jets game did you watch?

That was the game when our OL gave up 4 sacks on Favre along with 3 fumbles. He also only completed 14 (41%) of his passes in that game. Of those 20 incompletions, some of those were a result of the OL not doing their job & giving Favre enough time.

Purple Floyd
02-16-2012, 07:07 AM
You want a good OL get yourself a good Qb and running back. AD is a great back so teams play on the line. The reason the line looked better in 2009 is because Favre forced teams to back off. Teams could no longer play 1 on 1 on the outside. and put 1 or 2 safeties on the LOS.

We don't have the deep threat of Rice ( means no safety over the top)
We still have AP which means a saftey in the box and constant run blitzers.


AP is terrible at screens and pass protection so I am not sure he is the answer. In fact he may be a big factor in hoe our QBs have llooked because he is so limited and one dimensional.


And the line still sucks.

i_bleed_purple
02-16-2012, 09:14 AM
You want a good OL get yourself a good Qb and running back. AD is a great back so teams play on the line. The reason the line looked better in 2009 is because Favre forced teams to back off.
No, he didn't. Teams still stacked the box regularly, favre made them pay. They most certainly did not back off.

Teams could no longer play 1 on 1 on the outside. and put 1 or 2 safeties on the LOS.
But they did. Think to almost every long Sid Rice catch. Single coverage.


We don't have the deep threat of Rice ( means no safety over the top)
We still have AP which means a saftey in the box and constant run blitzers.
Get us a good Qb that can make quick reads and a WR that can go up and get it, and we will see better Oline play.
No, we'll see the same OL play, just the improvement at QB makes them look better

kevoncox
02-16-2012, 03:36 PM
What Jets game did you watch?

That was the game when our OL gave up 4 sacks on Favre along with 3 fumbles. He also only completed 14 (41%) of his passes in that game. Of those 20 incompletions, some of those were a result of the OL not doing their job & giving Favre enough time.

I expected worst. They were a very tough defense that year and we competed with them down to the wire. Our Oline gave consistent pockets. Farve played like shit most of the game but we still hung in there.

kevoncox
02-16-2012, 03:38 PM
No, he didn't. Teams still stacked the box regularly, favre made them pay. They most certainly did not back off.
But they did. Think to almost every long Sid Rice catch. Single coverage.

No, we'll see the same OL play, just the improvement at QB makes them look better

I don't feel like arguing but it is apparent. That teams expect the run vs. us and stack the box. A good Qb will remove that stack box. Teams stop stacking the box as frequent as they did before and now.

keystonevike
02-21-2012, 06:30 PM
What should we have done? Continued to allow McKinnie to half-ass his way through another season? Continued to allow a guy who showed up GROSSLY overweight soak up cap space while underperforming? Or are you going to try and sell me on the notion that "Pro Bowl Left Tackle" Bryant McKinnie was a solid player in his last few seasons here?

We cut McKinnie because he was a worthless pile of goo who had underperformed season after season. His fat ass was on cruise control. We signed Charlie Johnson because he was all that was available in the 11th hour.

When McKinnie got picked up by Baltimore, I'm fairly certain that he was snapped back into the reality that he had to perform in order to keep his job. That lead to a return to better form...but Bryant, having demonstrated a proclivity towards laziness, will likely return to his slack-assed ways and become a blight on the Ravens O-Line...much like he was here.

So, that said, what options did we have? We could have kept the human turnstile....and our end result would have been the same. Or, we could have cut him and attempted to replace him...which we did. Which LT's did YOU think were better options?

Fact is, as bad as Johnson played, it wasn't far off from the level that McKinnie had been giving us. Will we seek to replace Johnson this season? I certainly hope so. But pointing to THIS as a reason for the Vikings failure is inaccurate. McKinnie brought this on himself. He left the team no choice. It's THAT simple.

Caine

Well put.

bleedpurple
02-21-2012, 09:18 PM
We should have claimed Jared Gaither off of waivers when he became available instead of letting the chargers grab him....

Marrdro
02-28-2012, 05:31 AM
I agree with Singer to a point. Any line should see improvement over an 8 game stretch let alone 5-6 years and ours has been plagued by the same core problems through all of the roster and coaching changes which leads me to believe it can be certainly pinned on coaching, but then again it could also be a schematic problem as well as the FO not putting the right talent in place.

I believe it is a combination of all of them and that is a problem at the top where everything should be put together.

Great post, except for the "Agreeing with Singer" comment.......

I had issues when we tried to run two blocking schemes. Last year ole chucklehead Musgrove had his OL coach teaching 4.

When you watch a HOF G (Hutch) looking confused, then something is really really wrong, and it has nothing to do with talent or the players and everything to do with the coaches that are coaching the players.

Of course we could blame this on the players by saying that the players should be coaching players.......snicker.....

Marrdro
02-28-2012, 05:39 AM
I've got to wonder exactly how much of our OL woes are directly related to the coaches. You can blame the players up to a point, but when you see little or no improvement at all ever since Childress became coach in 2006, you have to point the finger at coaching as well.

Frazier made Davidson our new OL coach a year ago, but I certainly can't see his impact yet.
Are you trying to tell me that our OL didn't improve in 2006 from 2005? Hell it improved drastically (note the first 1,000 yard rusher in forever and the number of penalties that we didn't have after our RT left).

Our OL was fine and did a good enough job in 2009 if memory serves, atleast until the Aints came in and whooped the crap out of old Noodle arm for holding the ball to long while he tried to force things to Rice (who made him look good by the way). Our issues were more related to injuries and players who had blocking responsibilities other than the OLmen.

Again, it all comes down to coaching. In 2010 we had alot of injuries and still ranked in the middle of the pack with respect to league ranking. Same can be said for 2011, and both years saw alot of players being rotated in and out because of injury. That doesn't happen with a line as suspect as you seem to alway contend.

Long story short, simplify the scheme (cut back from 4 schemes to 1 or 2) and coach to it and the OL will be fine, especially if the "Other" blockers responsible for keeping the QB on his feet do their jobs.

Marrdro
02-28-2012, 05:43 AM
I don't think the OL is as bad as you guys did. I say plent of pockets and opputunities. However, the OL can only do so much when you have no WRS and they don't have to play you honestly. Teams are going to blitz and stack the box to stop AD. They are going to bring more than we can block and since out QB cannot throw them out of it...we saw more of it. Noticed when he started having some success, they backed off.
Someone talking sense.

I like how most on here completely forget about, or choose to ignore that when you have 5 OLmen blocking more than 5 defenders, someone else is to blame for our QB getting his butt handed to him on a platter. ;)

AngloVike
02-28-2012, 01:35 PM
Someone talking sense.

I like how most on here completely forget about, or choose to ignore that when you have 5 OLmen blocking more than 5 defenders, someone else is to blame for our QB getting his butt handed to him on a platter. ;)

yep usually our dozy arsed OC for calling some crap play that entails our QB waiting for the WR to get clear and getting pummelled for his trouble :clap:

i_bleed_purple
02-28-2012, 02:03 PM
Someone talking sense.

I like how most on here completely forget about, or choose to ignore that when you have 5 OLmen blocking more than 5 defenders, someone else is to blame for our QB getting his butt handed to him on a platter. ;)

hmm...I can think of many people:

LT for missing his block
LG for missing his block
C for missing his block
RG for missing his block
RT for missing his block.

QB for not recognizing blitz and making a change
C for not making proper line adjustments
OC for not calling appropriate plays
OL coach for not coaching the OL well enough
WRs for not getting open

But quick question, when the D blitzes 6 guys (happens fairly frequently), and we don't max-protect, but Ponder still gets hit by 2 guys, how is that not the OL's fault?

Lippythelion69
02-28-2012, 04:55 PM
I want badly to believe that we did the right thing on selecting this guy 12th overall I just have serious concerns on his ability to hold up. Look at his injuries in 3 consecutive years.

Junior year - Throwing Shoulder injury
Senior year - Elbow injuries
Rookie season - 3 different serious injuries including Hip, Concussion and Hip again.

I just don't know if this guy is capable of being the guy for 8 years or more.
Because of this I really want us to swallow our pride, take the media firestorm and draft Robert Griffin.
Capable of sub 4.4 speed, Rocket for an arm and compact throwing motion (except when deep), he is the best QB we will have a shot at for years. He is super intelligent, can read defenses and is very careful with the ball. Simply put he should be the #1 pick ahead of Luck but that bandwagon is out of control. Picture Vick, minus the off field drama, with the brain of an Oxford graduate, and the passing poise of Montana. This pick at #3 will define this franchise for another decade and we will be kicking ourselves if we mess this up. In a league driven by the passing game, why we seem to be ok with "good enough" as opposed to an excellent Qb, is beyond me. Other needs be damned, this kid was on team devoid of talent minus a 1st round WR and he lead them to a bowl game and bowl victory. Draft Griffin and trade Ponder for a 2nd or 3rd to the Bills, Skins, Cards, and or Browns.

I don't care what system you play in 4000+ yards throwing, 37tds and 6 ints, while completing 72% of his passes is obscene.

Baylor's Robert Griffin III: 2011 Heisman Trophy Winner & Most Exciting Player in the Country! - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO3QkCbt0ys&feature=related)




said it before ponder throws a couple of blistering balls and the next few lack power.....reminds me of pennington......take griffin......but again we have so many holes.....trading down and getting more picks might be prudent......?.but. RGIII. puts fannys in the seats.......and the best qb the vikes will ever have a shot at in the next 5 yrs + in the draft.

Caine
02-28-2012, 06:52 PM
Still don't see a convincing reason not to take RGIII in the draft. QB is a cornerstone piece, and Ponder hasn't proven anything yet. Not saying he can't, or that he won't, but forcing 2 capable players to fight it out has no real downside...unless we're wrong about both...

Caine

midgensa
02-28-2012, 09:34 PM
Still don't see a convincing reason not to take RGIII in the draft. QB is a cornerstone piece, and Ponder hasn't proven anything yet. Not saying he can't, or that he won't, but forcing 2 capable players to fight it out has no real downside...unless we're wrong about both...

Caine

I am firmly on the RGIII train if he falls to us. I see no reason to pass him up.

Mark_The_Viking
02-29-2012, 06:04 AM
You would pass on an elite LT to take RGIII?. If you do how do we protect him form getting killed any better than we failed to protect Ponder?

slavinator
02-29-2012, 12:55 PM
Agreed on the premise that Ponder has some injury concerns. I think the kid has moxie in a big way. He got killed behind our crappy line in an offseason where he first thought he would be the guy and then got thrown in when McRibb turned out to be worse than expected. I think an offseason with the team as the guy, but still having to prove it will do wonders. I would love to take another QB and RG3 looks like a damn good one, but with the holes we have I would rather see is build from the lines and secondary first. No matter what we do it will need to be under the guise of competing to win our division, even RG3 alone with the line issues we have is not enough....

midgensa
02-29-2012, 12:58 PM
You would pass on an elite LT to take RGIII?. If you do how do we protect him form getting killed any better than we failed to protect Ponder?

Yes ... you always take an elite QB over and elite LT. You take an ELITE QB over any other elite position. If we don't think that RGIII is elite ... that is fine. But you can have all the elite LTs in the world (look at the Browns and Dolphins) but they don't matter with bad QB play.

On the other hand you can have elite QBs like Manning and they even make Charlie Johnson look like a capable LT.

AngloVike
02-29-2012, 01:09 PM
Yes ... you always take an elite QB over and elite LT. You take an ELITE QB over any other elite position. If we don't think that RGIII is elite ... that is fine. But you can have all the elite LTs in the world (look at the Browns and Dolphins) but they don't matter with bad QB play.

On the other hand you can have elite QBs like Manning and they even make Charlie Johnson look like a capable LT.
and going by draft positions Manning would be considered an elite QB against Tom Brady - so how many SB rings and appearances does he have in comparison.
Problem with trying to concentrate on the elite QB to the detriment of other positions on the team... when said superstar is out or gone then the team's season tends to go tits up - ala Colts last season

midgensa
02-29-2012, 04:13 PM
and going by draft positions Manning would be considered an elite QB against Tom Brady - so how many SB rings and appearances does he have in comparison.
Problem with trying to concentrate on the elite QB to the detriment of other positions on the team... when said superstar is out or gone then the team's season tends to go tits up - ala Colts last season

So you don't take a chance on getting an elite QB because you THINK you MIGHT have an elite LT?

I don't see what Tom Brady or Peyton Manning have to do with the argument at all.

If you have a chance at an ELITE QB and don't think you have one (which I think most here would agree that we don't think we have one) then you take him. And ELITE QB is more important to any team than ANY other position.

If RGIII is truly elite (which he could bust of course ... and so could Matt Kalil) then RG III and No Name Tackle is better than Average QB and Matt Kalil EVERY time.

Marrdro
03-01-2012, 01:28 AM
But quick question, when the D blitzes 6 guys (happens fairly frequently), and we don't max-protect, but Ponder still gets hit by 2 guys, how is that not the OL's fault?
Blitz 6???????? How do you blitz 6?

Saw alot of 4 man fronts providing pressure with 2 and 3 men blitzing, but never 6 men. Sounds like a new scheme that you should send to our new D - Coord. :)

Besides, In our scheme, the way to defeat the blitz is to get rid of the ball quickly to your hot read based on the sight adjustment made by the QB and the WR's. Our problem this year was we usually only had one WR on the field and that makes it pretty hard to make a sigth adjustment.


What we were don this year, was to put the responsibility of the RB/FB or one of the 2 or 3 TE's, not a OLmen to pick up the blitzer. They, not our OL, for the most part, were the reason, along with the inability to take advantage of the blitz via the hot read adjustment (see above) were the reason Ponder was on his ass alot my friend.

Marrdro
03-01-2012, 01:33 AM
Still don't see a convincing reason not to take RGIII in the draft. QB is a cornerstone piece, and Ponder hasn't proven anything yet. Not saying he can't, or that he won't, but forcing 2 capable players to fight it out has no real downside...unless we're wrong about both...

Caine
I can see your point, to an extent, but only because we are talking the QB position. The other side of that point, at least for me, is taking a QB high 2 years in a row is about as dumb as the Lions taking WR's high 3 years in a row.

Either you have to trust your scouts and front office pukes to get it right and provide the staff the right guy, that matches the scheme, and most importantly, you have to rely on your coaching staff to get the kid(s) ready.

I think the FO pukes got it right with Ponder. I'm just not sure about the coaching staff right now.

Lets hope we can fix our WR corps, get AD and Toby back and get our OL back to 1 or 2 blocking schemes vice 4 so young Ponder has a group around him that he can work with.

Purple Floyd
03-01-2012, 06:58 AM
Blitz 6???????? How do you blitz 6?


Saw alot of 4 man fronts providing pressure with 2 and 3 men blitzing, but never 6 men. Sounds like a new scheme that you should send to our new D - Coord. :)

Besides, In our scheme, the way to defeat the blitz is to get rid of the ball quickly to your hot read based on the sight adjustment made by the QB and the WR's. Our problem this year was we usually only had one WR on the field and that makes it pretty hard to make a sigth adjustment.


What we were don this year, was to put the responsibility of the RB/FB or one of the 2 or 3 TE's, not a OLmen to pick up the blitzer. They, not our OL, for the most part, were the reason, along with the inability to take advantage of the blitz via the hot read adjustment (see above) were the reason Ponder was on his ass alot my friend.

I still say the best way to counter the pass rush is to use the chip block by the RB and the screen pass to RB's in this KAO part 2 but we are tied to Peterson and he can't pass block or catch screens consistently enough to give them either option

kevoncox
03-01-2012, 09:31 AM
I can see your point, to an extent, but only because we are talking the QB position. The other side of that point, at least for me, is taking a QB high 2 years in a row is about as dumb as the Lions taking WR's high 3 years in a row.

Either you have to trust your scouts and front office pukes to get it right and provide the staff the right guy, that matches the scheme, and most importantly, you have to rely on your coaching staff to get the kid(s) ready.

I think the FO pukes got it right with Ponder. I'm just not sure about the coaching staff right now.

Lets hope we can fix our WR corps, get AD and Toby back and get our OL back to 1 or 2 blocking schemes vice 4 so young Ponder has a group around him that he can work with.

Marr,
Ponder would be the 4th or 5th QB drafted in the class.
We made a mistake last year. It is not foolish to correct it, it is foolish to pretend we didn't and submerge this team for 4 more years. Even though you won't admit it, TJ is/was not an elite QB. When you have the chance to draft a guy that has ELITE QB written all over him (of course its potential) you take him. Period! It's the reason we are at the bottom of the barrel and only getting worst.

Marrdro
03-02-2012, 03:55 AM
Marr,
Ponder would be the 4th or 5th QB drafted in the class.
We made a mistake last year. It is not foolish to correct it, it is foolish to pretend we didn't and submerge this team for 4 more years. Even though you won't admit it, TJ is/was not an elite QB. When you have the chance to draft a guy that has ELITE QB written all over him (of course its potential) you take him. Period! It's the reason we are at the bottom of the barrel and only getting worst.
I never said TJ was elite. I contend that he is nothing more than a viable starter.

Not sure why you are so ready to give up on Ponder. Kid did nothing but good stuff with very few weapons. All you have to do is to give him a couple of those things called WR's, and send in packages with those things called WR's and he will be fine.

As to RGIII. I wouldn't be upset if they drafted him, but at this very same time last year, everyone was questioning if Cam was the right pick. Why? Because he wasn't a typical QB and would require a special offense to be successful in. Credit to the Panthers coaching staff for coming up with that scheme.

Having said that though, as I asked earlier, would RGIII be rated as high as he is this year, if it wouldn't have been for Cams success last year? I don't think so and it doesn't matter were the kid is taken, if he isn't taken by a team that knows how to craft a offense he can be successful in, he won't succeed.

Our staff isn't that staff my friend.

kevoncox
03-02-2012, 05:56 AM
I never said TJ was elite. I contend that he is nothing more than a viable starter.

Not sure why you are so ready to give up on Ponder. Kid did nothing but good stuff with very few weapons. All you have to do is to give him a couple of those things called WR's, and send in packages with those things called WR's and he will be fine.

As to RGIII. I wouldn't be upset if they drafted him, but at this very same time last year, everyone was questioning if Cam was the right pick. Why? Because he wasn't a typical QB and would require a special offense to be successful in. Credit to the Panthers coaching staff for coming up with that scheme.

Having said that though, as I asked earlier, would RGIII be rated as high as he is this year, if it wouldn't have been for Cams success last year? I don't think so and it doesn't matter were the kid is taken, if he isn't taken by a team that knows how to craft a offense he can be successful in, he won't succeed.

Our staff isn't that staff my friend.

I'm simply saying to you that we wasted 4+ years trying to coach a below average QB up to an adequate one. Ponder looked decent until film caught up on him. He also cannot throw the out route/ 18 yard comeback. The velocity on those throws are alarming and he will always struggle to complete those passes. Unfortunately, those passes are a big part of the passing tree in today's NFL. I also do not like the fact that he seemed to continue his streak of serious injuries form college. Hard to get better sitting in plain clothes.

I think Griffen would have the buzz he has w/o Cam. The comparison is asinine. One guy is a power rusher, the other is a sprinter. One guy has 1 year under his belt, the other is a 3 year starter. Griffens college stats showed a guy that passed first and rushed as a last resort. He can't be compared to anyone. No one has showed this amount of speed but this ability as a rusher. Vick was a pure rusher with little passing ability (3000 passing yard in his college career), Cam was a power rusher with above average passing ability. This guy is an elite passer with 4.3 speed. We haven't seen that before and it's why teams are drooling and offering their first born for him.
Forget the fact that they all play in the spread. That is now the norm. Teams are over that and the only ones still harping on the spread QB thing are ex scouts who haven't caught up.

I would like to point out again, we did not get an elite QB lst year. We got a QB would go in the late 3rd or 4th round this year.

i_bleed_purple
03-02-2012, 07:44 AM
Kid did nothing but good stuff with very few weapons.
What Vikings were you watching? I saw minimal 'good stuff', with very much 'bad stuff'. You can't pretend he played well. He had a couple decent to alright peformances, but I'm not even sure he played better than TJ would have.

i_bleed_purple
03-02-2012, 07:48 AM
I would like to point out again, we did not get an elite QB lst year. We got a QB would go in the late 3rd or 4th round this year.

THIS! People need to realize, we picked the 4th best QB in the draft. There usually aren't 4 elite QB's in any draft, especially this one. The 2011 draft was very weak for talent at the QB spot, when guys like Mallett were considered hot prospects at some point, that says alot.

As I said before, just because you pick someone with a first pick, doesn't make him a first-round calibre player. You have to go out and prove that, and Ponder has not yet. If we stick with him, fine, but to pass on RGIII or Luck would be absolutely asinine.

Marrdro
03-03-2012, 03:36 AM
What Vikings were you watching? I saw minimal 'good stuff', with very much 'bad stuff'. You can't pretend he played well. He had a couple decent to alright peformances, but I'm not even sure he played better than TJ would have.
Minimal good stuff?

I pretend nothing. Your just confused over what I'm saying (AGAIN).

The kid was touted as the "Most NFL Ready" QB coming out of the draft last year. I think he actually proved that with the exception of Dalton.

Cam had the luxury of a staff who knew how to dumb the offense down to suite his strengths,

Dalton had a nice run, but had some nice options/targets at WR and still had just as many INT's and only a couple more TD's and had the opportunity of playing the full year.

Locker had a vet ahead of him but when he got the chance looked to be what he was, a rook.

Gabbert had about the same TD/INT as Ponder with a few more yards. About what you would expect for a kid that had a sound ground game and no WR's to throw to.

Then you can compare him to the likes of Kolb, Tebow, Bradford, Orton etc, and I would still take him as our starter.

Again, what was I watching? Football and a young QB learning on the field who has a fan base who doesn't have a clue about what its like to watch a kid learn under fire. All his fanbase wants is instant success.

Did he make a few mistakes? Sure. Only a idiot wouldn't have expected to see those, but did we also see him have some very nice moments? Hell yes. That first game against the PUKERS was a damn fine showing.

Given time he'll learn what throws he can make and what throws he shouldn't even try, but he didn't look confused, the players are behind him, and with a few more weapons and a staff who can craft a scheme for him, he should turn out to be a damn fine QB in this league.

Marrdro
03-03-2012, 03:40 AM
THIS! People need to realize, we picked the 4th best QB in the draft. There usually aren't 4 elite QB's in any draft, especially this one. The 2011 draft was very weak for talent at the QB spot, when guys like Mallett were considered hot prospects at some point, that says alot.

As I said before, just because you pick someone with a first pick, doesn't make him a first-round calibre player. You have to go out and prove that, and Ponder has not yet. If we stick with him, fine, but to pass on RGIII or Luck would be absolutely asinine.
Very weak? What the hell are you talking about.

Depending on what analyst you listened to, there were supposed to be 7 or possibly 8 "Franchise" guys come out of that class. So far, 2 of them are living up to the hype, 2 of them did OK considering what was around them and 2 others really didn't get much of a chance.

Weak. LOL,

Johnson14
03-03-2012, 03:51 AM
What Vikings were you watching? I saw minimal 'good stuff', with very much 'bad stuff'. You can't pretend he played well. He had a couple decent to alright peformances, but I'm not even sure he played better than TJ would have.

Yeah I'm with IBP on this one, Ponder showed me more bad stuff than good stuff last year. He "lit up" the packers secondary in his first game for 300+ yards or whatever, who were ranked 32nd in the NFL, even then for example he under threw a wide open Jenkins on the first play, and that is the only thing that prevented the touchdown on that play.

For me, there were more questions than answers from this kid last year, I have seen nothing yet that shows me we made the right decision taking this kid.. that said, I back him when he steps onto the field 100%, nothing but suport here, it's just I'm not drinking the Ponderade just yet.

kevoncox
03-03-2012, 09:11 PM
Minimal good stuff?

Again, what was I watching? Football and a young QB learning on the field who has a fan base who doesn't have a clue about what its like to watch a kid learn under fire. All his fanbase wants is instant success.
.

You ignored my previous comments about his arm strength. No on the field preparedness will help him make those throws.

i_bleed_purple
03-03-2012, 09:32 PM
Very weak? What the hell are you talking about.

Depending on what analyst you listened to, there were supposed to be 7 or possibly 8 "Franchise" guys come out of that class.
And I call bullshit. Name them.
Gabbert, Locker, Newton, Mallet. After that who? Ponder? Dalton? Those two, and probably mallett too were not "SUPPOSED" to be franchise players. There was one guy who people thought would be a sure thing. Gabbert. Newton was a high risk/high reward type guy, Locker was a potential guy, Mallett was a talented kid with some downside. After that Ponder and Dalton were very average. 3rd round talent. The hype surrounding the QB position mixed with the fact we were drafting for need rather than BPA pushed Ponder into the first round.



So far, 2 of them are living up to the hype, 2 of them did OK considering what was around them and 2 others really didn't get much of a chance. I assume you mean Dalton and Newton are living up to it. (Dalton wasn't projected as a franchise guy, so I don't know where you're getting this stuff from) Gabbert is shitting the bed, Locker is doing pretty decent all things considered. Ponder is shitting the bed, but he's got no surrounding cast.

Am I incorrect? If so, please point out how.


Weak. LOL,

Sure is.

There was not a sure-thing guy. After that, a bunch of kids with questions who COULD become good players, but certainly not guys you can't miss because they're absolutely going to be franchisie players.

i_bleed_purple
03-03-2012, 09:36 PM
Minimal good stuff?

I pretend nothing. Your just confused over what I'm saying (AGAIN).

The kid was touted as the "Most NFL Ready" QB coming out of the draft last year. I think he actually proved that with the exception of Dalton.
No, he wasn't. Gabbert for the most part was. Ponder was touted as an intelligent kid with injury concerns and a weak arm.


Cam had the luxury of a staff who knew how to dumb the offense down to suite his strengths,

Dalton had a nice run, but had some nice options/targets at WR and still had just as many INT's and only a couple more TD's and had the opportunity of playing the full year.

Locker had a vet ahead of him but when he got the chance looked to be what he was, a rook.

Gabbert had about the same TD/INT as Ponder with a few more yards. About what you would expect for a kid that had a sound ground game and no WR's to throw to.

Then you can compare him to the likes of Kolb, Tebow, Bradford, Orton etc, and I would still take him as our starter.

Again, what was I watching? Football and a young QB learning on the field who has a fan base who doesn't have a clue about what its like to watch a kid learn under fire. All his fanbase wants is instant success.

If you wan't to talk about whether or not it's fair to judge him based on having a poor supporting cast, fine, but your exact words were
Kid did nothing but good stuff

Unless they recently changed the definition of the following words: Nothing, but, good, stuff, then I'd say your comment is 100% inaccurate


Did he make a few mistakes? Sure.
Yes he did, did he make alot of mistakes? Sure. Was his play more poor than good? I'd say so.

Only a idiot wouldn't have expected to see those, but did we also see him have some very nice moments? Hell yes. That first game against the PUKERS was a damn fine showing.
I see your definition of damn fine is also skewed. I saw some very nice plays, I also saw plays that cost us the game. Coming directly from him.


he should turn out to be a damn fine QB in this league.

As good as TJ? :rofl:

kevoncox
03-04-2012, 12:37 AM
Again, I'm not here saying that Ponder didn't flash some ability this year. Im just concerned that we will not see much growth from this point. He will get better but be a Jon Kitna type QB.

Caine
03-04-2012, 10:05 AM
Again, what was I watching? Football and a young QB learning on the field who has a fan base who doesn't have a clue about what its like to watch a kid learn under fire. All his fanbase wants is instant success.


Stop. Just stop.

Every time you take a stance that is in direct opposition to what the majority thinks, you fall back on the "clueless fanbase" or "yutz" line in order to try and discredit what is being said on the opposite side.

In essence, you're now calling ME clueless. ME.

Then I must ask, how does it feel to have your ass handed to you by a clueless guy all the time?

Fact is, the fanbase isn't clueless....no more so than any other fanbase. Take a good look at the Packer fanbase - lot of waterheads wearing Packer garb here in southern Wisconsin. How about the Bears fanbase....I can't even begin to count how many tater-tots with blue and orange shirts have spewed forth frothy piles of stupid in my presence.

Viking fans aren't any different taken as a whole. We have our share of astute fans who are knowledgable about the game as a whole, we have our "homers" who believe that every Viking is a Pro-Bowler regardless of actual performance, and then we have the morons who think Jackson was a good QB, Childress was a good HC, and that our O-line was "pretty good" last year.

Fact is, Ponders success or failure has nothing to do with the fanbase. The kid didn't play particularly well last season, but he didn't play particularly bad either, all things considered. He MIGHT turn into a great QB, but he might not as well. And THAT is why taking a QB like RGIII is actually a smart move. There is no real downside unless we miss on both.

Yes, we have other needs as well, but QB is the heart of the team. Without a good one, you go nowhere. Ask the Colts. We have an opportunity to elevate ourselves at the most important position in the game...we'd be clueless NOT to.

Caine

Marrdro
03-06-2012, 07:36 AM
Stop. Just stop.

Every time you take a stance that is in direct opposition to what the majority thinks, you fall back on the "clueless fanbase" or "yutz" line in order to try and discredit what is being said on the opposite side.

In essence, you're now calling ME clueless. ME.

Then I must ask, how does it feel to have your ass handed to you by a clueless guy all the time?


LOL, yea, thats it. Just follow the mindless masses. Don't even try to have a original thought because if deviates from what the masses think. You crack me up.

Besides, show me one place were I've said anything other than I'm just a yutz with a keyboard. Difference between you and I is that I admit I'm just a fan that doesn't have a clue.

You on the other hand think your a fan who has all the answers. One of us is right, the other is wrong (again).


Fact is, the fanbase isn't clueless....no more so than any other fanbase. Take a good look at the Packer fanbase - lot of waterheads wearing Packer garb here in southern Wisconsin. How about the Bears fanbase....I can't even begin to count how many tater-tots with blue and orange shirts have spewed forth frothy piles of stupid in my presence.

Holding court with idiots and then judging them cause they are idiots I see? LOL.


Viking fans aren't any different taken as a whole. We have our share of astute fans who are knowledgable about the game as a whole, we have our "homers" who believe that every Viking is a Pro-Bowler regardless of actual performance, and then we have the morons who think Jackson was a good QB, Childress was a good HC, and that our O-line was "pretty good" last year.

Just like we have MORONS who refuse to admit that they were wrong about TJ and think he isn't a viable starter.....Probably the same moron who thinks that the OL is the sole reason for blocking issues.

We're fans. We haven't a clue about the goings on inside the sport. And that means all of us my friend.


Fact is, Ponders success or failure has nothing to do with the fanbase.
Were in the hell did I say that?


The kid didn't play particularly well last season, but he didn't play particularly bad either, all things considered. He MIGHT turn into a great QB, but he might not as well. And THAT is why taking a QB like RGIII is actually a smart move. There is no real downside unless we miss on both.
But it isn't a smart move. Why waste another pick on a QB when you could use it to fix another position.

The only reason why you don't do that, and you do take RGIII is if you (as a staff) think you made a mistake with Ponder. Having said that, if our staff was dumb enough to get it wrong on Ponder, who or what says that they are smart enough to get it right with RGIII?

Truth of the matter is, our staff won't take a QB, they got it right with Ponder last year, regardless of what the PREDOMINANCE of the Vikings fan base thinks (lump yourself in there if you want) and will take a OT or a WR or even a CB, because they know what they hell they are doing. The only ones that are entertaining the asinine idea of take a QB is a bunch of yutz fans.


Yes, we have other needs as well, but QB is the heart of the team. Without a good one, you go nowhere. Ask the Colts. We have an opportunity to elevate ourselves at the most important position in the game...we'd be clueless NOT to.

Caine

Unless of course you have already elevated yourself.

Quick question, how far did the PUKERS make it with their "Heart"? How about the Patriots and their "Heart".

You keep your "Heart", and the passing game that you associate it with that "Heart" and I'll take a team that is balanced across the board. That how you win. Balance.

Marrdro
03-06-2012, 07:39 AM
Again, I'm not here saying that Ponder didn't flash some ability this year. Im just concerned that we will not see much growth from this point. He will get better but be a Jon Kitna type QB.
It really doesn't matter how much growth he has if the team doesn't grow with him though does it?

You, above all others on here, should know this is a TEAM sport. Not a QB sport.

Marrdro
03-06-2012, 07:44 AM
No, he wasn't. Gabbert for the most part was. Ponder was touted as an intelligent kid with injury concerns and a weak arm.

Nope, your wrong. Ponder was touted as the most ready. Most of the concerns about Gabbert was that he couldn't even get out from under Center.



If you wan't to talk about whether or not it's fair to judge him based on having a poor supporting cast, fine, but your exact words were

Unless they recently changed the definition of the following words: Nothing, but, good, stuff, then I'd say your comment is 100% inaccurate

OK, I can agree with you on that. He did make mistakes, I think I admitted to that someplace in there.


I also saw plays that cost us the game. Coming directly from him.

And I saw JA miss tackles that cost us the game, just like I saw K-dubb not get to the QB when he needed to that cost us games, just like I saw AD make a bad blitz pickup or a bad cutback that cost us games.

If we are going to deal in absolutes, lets blame everyone who needs to be blamed and not just the young QB you don't like.


As good as TJ? :rofl:

......snicker......Thought you would get a charge out of that.

Marrdro
03-06-2012, 07:58 AM
And I call bullshit. Name them.
Gabbert, Locker, Newton, Mallet. After that who? Ponder? Dalton? Those two, and probably mallett too were not "SUPPOSED" to be franchise players. There was one guy who people thought would be a sure thing. Gabbert. Newton was a high risk/high reward type guy, Locker was a potential guy, Mallett was a talented kid with some downside. After that Ponder and Dalton were very average. 3rd round talent. The hype surrounding the QB position mixed with the fact we were drafting for need rather than BPA pushed Ponder into the first round.

I assume you mean Dalton and Newton are living up to it. (Dalton wasn't projected as a franchise guy, so I don't know where you're getting this stuff from) Gabbert is shitting the bed, Locker is doing pretty decent all things considered. Ponder is shitting the bed, but he's got no surrounding cast.

Am I incorrect? If so, please point out how.


Sure is.

There was not a sure-thing guy. After that, a bunch of kids with questions who COULD become good players, but certainly not guys you can't miss because they're absolutely going to be franchisie players.
None of them are a sure thing. Hell, Cam could still become a bust. Take a look at how guys like Sanchez, Bradford and Ryan are having issues.

As to how many and who, you named them all but left off Kaepernick and the guy that was being most vocal about it was Mayock, but he wasn't the only one my friend. Search the site, I posted several articles that said as much.

Quick question, how long do you think it takes to find out if a guy is a "Franchise" guy or not?

Based on your comment about Ponder and his bed, I think I have a pretty good idea what your answer is going to be.

Marrdro
03-06-2012, 08:04 AM
You ignored my previous comments about his arm strength. No on the field preparedness will help him make those throws.
I didn't ignore it. Go back to my original post on the cat when we drafted him. I was very concerned about his arm strength. Fact is, I was a little upset that we didn't land Locker, but after listening to guys like Mayock, I don't think his arm strength is as big issue.

Again, you give him some targets and you won't see him trying to make throws his arm can't make just like you won't see DB's sitting back waiting to jump routes cause they know that the guy they are covering is were the guy is gonna throw.

For the life of me I can't figure out what the hell Musgrove was doing last year with respect to player packages, especially when it came to how many WR's he put on the field in certain down and distance situations.

Talk about setting a kid up to fail. I, for one, got a very strong sense that Leslie didn't want to even put Ponder on the field. For him it was Dnabb or nothing. Hard to believe that a HC would do that but that's what I came away from the season with.

Marrdro
03-06-2012, 08:10 AM
Yeah I'm with IBP on this one, Ponder showed me more bad stuff than good stuff last year. He "lit up" the packers secondary in his first game for 300+ yards or whatever, who were ranked 32nd in the NFL, even then for example he under threw a wide open Jenkins on the first play, and that is the only thing that prevented the touchdown on that play.

For me, there were more questions than answers from this kid last year, I have seen nothing yet that shows me we made the right decision taking this kid.. that said, I back him when he steps onto the field 100%, nothing but suport here, it's just I'm not drinking the Ponderade just yet.
Giants fans had questions when it came to Eli going into this year my friend so saying there are questions with respect to Ponder are OK.

Quick question, what are your feelings about Flacco? How about Sanchez? Bradford? Ryan? Truth is there just isn't enough out there to actually feel good or bad IMHO and, atleast for me, I will have questions about his play for many years to come, regardless of what happens in the next 16 games.

It takes to long to get to the level most fans want is all I'm saying. To give up on Ponder half way through the season kindof negates getting those answers is all I'm saying.

battleaxe4cheese
03-06-2012, 08:22 AM
Is it just me or does this discussion seem like total insanity? I mean what the?

Facts:

1. No off season for Ponder as a rookie QB in the NFL.
2. Ponder wasn't even supposed to be the starter last year, hence Donny McOnehopper.
3. Quite possibly the worst O line play I have ever seen wearing Vikings uniforms.
4. Had roughly .4 seconds to throw the ball on virtually every play (or run for his life).
5. The wide out corps was probably the worst I have ever seen in Vikings uniform....ever.
6. Basically a rookie O coordinator, who looked lost at times (very lost...Blazer/fake to Ponder?)
7. Because of horrible O line play/schemes, virtually no pocket for him to step into.
8. Things would of been a lot worse if he wasn't such a good athlete with the ability to escape.


On the flip side, I am not going to say he played good last year as I do not wear Pondervision glasses, but his performance has to be taken in context with his supporting cast. On the surface he didn't have a great year last year and made some really stupid throws. This is also a fact. But all I am saying is put some talent around him in the wide receiver department and allow him to work out of a respectable pocket occasionally and I think he will do well and will surprise a lot of you.

Marrdro
03-06-2012, 08:32 AM
Is it just me or does this discussion seem like total insanity? I mean what the?

Facts:

1. No off season for Ponder as a rookie QB in the NFL.
2. Ponder wasn't even supposed to be the starter last year, hence Donny McOnehopper.
3. Quite possibly the worst O line play I have ever seen wearing Vikings uniforms.
4. Had roughly .4 seconds to throw the ball on virtually every play (or run for his life).
5. The wide out corps was probably the worst I have ever seen in Vikings uniform....ever.
6. Basically a rookie O coordinator, who looked lost at times (very lost...Blazer/fake to Ponder?)
7. Because of horrible O line play/schemes, virtually no pocket for him to step into.
8. Things would of been a lot worse if he wasn't such a good athlete with the ability to escape.


On the flip side, I am not going to say he played good last year as I do not wear Pondervision glasses, but his performance has to be taken in context with his supporting cast. On the surface he didn't have a great year last year and made some really stupid throws. This is also a fact. But all I am saying is put some talent around him in the wide receiver department and allow him to work out of a respectable pocket occasionally and I think he will do well and will surprise a lot of you.
Excellent post my friend. Couldn't agree more.

singersp
03-29-2012, 06:47 AM
We're doomed.......

4 Reasons Christian Ponder Will Shine Under Center in 2012

Minnesota Vikings: 4 Reasons Christian Ponder Will Shine Under Center in 2012 | Bleacher Report (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1120725-minnesota-vikings-4-reasons-christian-ponder-will-shine-under-center#/articles/1120725-minnesota-vikings-4-reasons-christian-ponder-will-shine-under-center/page/5)

Purple Floyd
03-29-2012, 07:28 AM
Not a convincing argument IMHO.

NodakPaul
03-29-2012, 08:32 AM
We're doomed.......

4 Reasons Christian Ponder Will Shine Under Center in 2012

Minnesota Vikings: 4 Reasons Christian Ponder Will Shine Under Center in 2012 | Bleacher Report (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1120725-minnesota-vikings-4-reasons-christian-ponder-will-shine-under-center#/articles/1120725-minnesota-vikings-4-reasons-christian-ponder-will-shine-under-center/page/5)

Reason #1 and #2 were pretty much the same, #3 is moot because CP already had a healthy AD for most of the year, and #4 is guessing.

I do think that having a true offseason will help Ponder considerably, but whether he will "shine" or not is yet to be determined.

i_bleed_purple
03-29-2012, 11:04 AM
More importantly, the reason Ponder will fail lies in his selection of sleeves. No QB will ever succeed wearing cuffed sleeves.

Look at some guys that come to mind. Jason campbell, tarvaris Jackson, (ok, that's all I can think of).

All the elite guys (Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers, hell, even Romo) wear loose sleeves.

For that reason, and that reason alone, Ponder will never amount to anything. Once he gets some loose sleeves like a real player who wears a number less than 10 has, he'll become a stud.

i_bleed_purple
03-29-2012, 11:05 AM
But about the article.... TJ had multiple full offseasons, chances to learn the playbook, AP and high-drafted skill players. Yet he still sucks.

You could claim ANY QB will be a stud for those reasons... but they never really end up that way do they?

i_bleed_purple
03-29-2012, 11:10 AM
Couldn't agree more.

To which point, our OL play was horrible?


This seems to contradict earlier statements from you

MaxVike
03-29-2012, 06:08 PM
We're doomed.......

4 Reasons Christian Ponder Will Shine Under Center in 2012

Minnesota Vikings: 4 Reasons Christian Ponder Will Shine Under Center in 2012 | Bleacher Report (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1120725-minnesota-vikings-4-reasons-christian-ponder-will-shine-under-center#/articles/1120725-minnesota-vikings-4-reasons-christian-ponder-will-shine-under-center/page/5)

A couple of decent thoughts, not taken to full fruition... But, I'm old, and, must have some optimism. I like Ponder's apparent leadership qualities; and, supposed intellect. That said, CJ7........seriously??? How about NFW with that?

jmcdon00
03-29-2012, 07:32 PM
He will be better, of this I'm sure. The only question is whether he will be good enough.
Additional reps with the WRs will help significantly.

Johnson14
03-31-2012, 03:47 AM
He will be better, of this I'm sure. The only question is whether he will be good enough..

+1

Not sure he could get any worse than last year, we're addressing O-Line issues (addition of Schwartz, drafting Kalil etc) and will (please god!) get him a decent deep threat wr in the draft, giving him a chance at least.

singersp
03-31-2012, 09:23 AM
+1

Not sure he could get any worse than last year, we're addressing O-Line issues (addition of Schwartz, drafting Kalil etc) and will (please god!) get him a decent deep threat wr in the draft, giving him a chance at least.

So you feel we'll be better off with Schwartz/Berger instead of Hutch/Herrera?

We haven't drafted Kalil yet, so you can't claim we're going to.

If our OL play gets worse than it was, our QB play can reflect that also. However, since our pass blocking was the worst in the league in 2011, we can't rank worse than 32 this year.

Lippythelion69
03-31-2012, 03:21 PM
said it before. Ponder throws a couple of rockets .And his next few are floaters...reminds me of Pennington
I hope im wrong? but......

Lippythelion69
03-31-2012, 03:23 PM
Anyone playing behind our offensive line would be injury prone. Brett Favre was known as an ironman before he landed behind our joke of a line. Then we went and cut McKinnie and made it even worse.

nail on the head BAM