In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

TheCoolerOne
Transition Player
Posts: 397
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:17 pm
Location: Ormond Beach, Florida
x 12

Re: In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

Post by TheCoolerOne »

The offensive line isnt as good as "the most physical in football" moniker you've given it but they have their plays.
Eli
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7946
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 5:52 pm

Re: In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

Post by Eli »

A team that completes 1 pass for 4 yards in any half of any game of the season does not immediately strike me as one that is "well rounded". Obviously, your line of reasoning differs 180 degrees from mine.

There are a lot of ways to win football games. And teams with very large problems still win football games, especially against teams with even larger problems.
Eli
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7946
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 5:52 pm

Re: In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

Post by Eli »

GBFavreFan wrote:So if a team is good in 7 out of 8 categories, that doesn't meet your definition of well-rounded, or did you just miss the point of the original post?
No, it does not. "Well-rounded" means having some degree of competency in _all_ aspects of play. It doesn't necessarily mean being good in all of them, but it does mean not being so terrible in some that you shake your head in disbelief.

You can't have the worst special teams in the NFL and claim to be well-rounded. You can't have zero running game, or a passing game that can't even complete two passes in a half, and make that claim. You can't have a defense that gives up 450 yards and an offense that gains 500 and claim to be well-rounded. Doesn't matter that one makes up for being horrible in another. It's preposterous.
User avatar
PurpleKoolaid
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8641
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:52 pm
x 28

Re: In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

Post by PurpleKoolaid »

No, it just means when our luck runs out, and we need to count on Ponder we will lose. And I dont see him getting better, but he is a bit like Tjoke, with the ups and downs, no consistancy. It certainly isnt something to be excited about...
User avatar
VikingLord
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8267
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: The Land of the Ice and Snow
x 959

Re: In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

Post by VikingLord »

GBFavreFan wrote:But what aspect could you focus on the Vikings to guarantee beating us?
Stop the run. It won't guarantee anything, but without big special team's plays it would likely be enough to win.
NDVikeFan
Pro Bowl Elite Player
Posts: 760
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 4:55 pm
Location: North Dakota
Contact:

Re: In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

Post by NDVikeFan »

I love ponder and all, and think he is the answer long term, but I don't see him doing anything to really help us this year. Not with these wrs anyways.
FailedtoOpen
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1854
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 2:26 pm

Re: In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

Post by FailedtoOpen »

PurpleKoolaid wrote:No, it just means when our luck runs out, and we need to count on Ponder we will lose.
So in games like the Jags, Colts, and Redskins right? Games in which Ponder, and the passing offense got us back into, or put us in a position to win said game.
Demi
Commissioner
Posts: 23785
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:24 pm
x 8

Re: In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

Post by Demi »

2007 all over again.

Best we can hope for with this incompetent quarterback is a first round beating from any other playoff team.

Once again we're back to winning in spite of our quarterback.
User avatar
PurpleKoolaid
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8641
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:52 pm
x 28

Re: In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

Post by PurpleKoolaid »

acousticrock wrote: TJack only had one UP (against Arizona) in all of his starts. He had some UPs in the preseason but those don't count.
Ponder has already had more UPs (Jax, Ind, SF) this season than TJack did during his multiple years.
If you say so. Walsh was much more the hero.
User avatar
PurpleKoolaid
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8641
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:52 pm
x 28

Re: In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

Post by PurpleKoolaid »

acousticrock wrote: I think Walsh would have had a difficult time being the hero kicking 80 yard FGs for the tie and win.
Ponder wouldnt have been able to make the winning drive if Walsh nadnt made the previous 56 yrd kick.
User avatar
VikingLord
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8267
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: The Land of the Ice and Snow
x 959

Re: In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

Post by VikingLord »

acousticrock wrote: TJack only had one UP (against Arizona) in all of his starts. He had some UPs in the preseason but those don't count.
Ponder has already had more UPs (Jax, Ind, SF) this season than TJack did during his multiple years.
That's like everyone noting how Ponder hadn't thrown an INT yet in his first couple of games to prove how accurate he was in spite of the fact that he had thrown several INT's that were just dropped by the opposing player.

Or that Ponder was so accurate and had such a high QB rating despite the fact that a very high percentage of his passes were simple dump offs and throws into the flat.

Or that Ponder somehow got the Vikings back into the game against Indy when in fact he threw a duck that was tipped not once, but twice, and somehow found it's way into the hands of the often imitated, but never duplicated, Stephen Burton. Minus that the Vikings are not in that game.

I'm not against Ponder per se, but defenses have adjusted to him as everyone should have expected and they are going to take away what he likes to do. They are going to try to force him into uncomfortable situations and get him to make mistakes, and he's now making those mistakes regularly. Ponder now has to respond. He has to show he can also adjust, learn on the fly, and take advantage of what the defense is now giving up. If they're up tight against Harvin, they're not going to be tight somewhere else. If they're sending pressure from one side, there will be a gap somewhere else. Ponder has to show he can exploit that or he's going to end up just like a heap of other QB's who couldn't make that leap.

Personally, I don't think he's going to do it, but I still have hope I am wrong. But what I'm looking to see from him is a guy who stops darting outside at the first hint of pressure, but rather presses up into the pocket and fires a dart into the heart of the defense. I'm looking for some recognition of what the defense is doing and an ability to exploit that. I'm looking for him to spot wide open guys and then throw accurately down the field. Note the down the field part of all of this. I don't buy that all the WR's stink. I don't buy that the offensive line is so terrible at blocking that Ponder has to take off nearly as much as he does. I don't even buy that the scheme is all that weak. Do the Vikings have a stable of WR's? No. Do the Vikings have that established, solid offensive line yet? No. But while those are not strengths per se, they are not blatant weaknesses, either. The Vikings have what many consider to be the best current all-around player in the NFL in Harvin. They have a huge pass-catching TE in Rudolph. They have vets like Jenkins and Aroma who has shown they can contribute as well. As far as the offensive line goes, they just opened up pretty big holes for AD against a very solid Arizona front. They seem to be able to block OK for Ponder when the Vikings need those late drives to tie. They're not as bad as some make them out to be, and quite frankly I'm puzzled and remain puzzled at the eagerness with these components of the offense keep being included in the explanation for a 4-yard half of passing. AD is ripping off big runs in the 1st half and the Cards need to cheat up to stop that and they *do* cheat up to stop it. They failed, but they did try to adjust to stop it. That should have opened things up for Ponder down the field even with our receivers and even with our offensive line. But it didn't, and it didn't because he refused to try it. He had thrown 2 picks and he didn't want to risk another one. That's the bottom line.
saint33
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1653
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 12:28 am

Re: In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

Post by saint33 »

PurpleKoolaid wrote: Ponder wouldnt have been able to make the winning drive if Walsh nadnt made the previous 56 yrd kick.
And Walsh wouldn't have been able to kick that ball without ponder driving the ball into fg position with 20 seconds left...
Image
saint33
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1653
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 12:28 am

Re: In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

Post by saint33 »

VikingLord wrote: That's like everyone noting how Ponder hadn't thrown an INT yet in his first couple of games to prove how accurate he was in spite of the fact that he had thrown several INT's that were just dropped by the opposing player.
Sorry but this is a ridiculous statement, dropped ints are not ints, period. If you want to count balls that defenders drop then it really wouldn't change anything comparatively. Sure ponder would have more ints, but so would every other qb in the league. Hell I'd say our secondary alone has dropped more ints than opposing defenses have against us in those same games.
Image
User avatar
jackal
Strong Safety
Posts: 11583
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 2:05 am
Location: California
x 5

Re: In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

Post by jackal »

honestly I am being realistic about this we won three games last we have already almost doubled late in half of the season

that is a crazy improvement. My goal is to win a super bowl for the Vikings ...

If we keep improving and getting great player in the draft eventually we will win one (Superbowl)
no one expects the Spanish Inquisition!
losperros
Commissioner
Posts: 10041
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Location: Burbank, California

Re: In a way, Ponder's piss poor performance was a good sign

Post by losperros »

jackal wrote:honestly I am being realistic about this we won three games last we have already almost doubled late in half of the season

that is a crazy improvement. My goal is to win a super bowl for the Vikings ...

If we keep improving and getting great player in the draft eventually we will win one (Superbowl)
I know what you mean. I went into this season saying that I just wanted to see improvement. 5-2 is improving beyond what I thought the team was capable of doing.

I nourish the same hope that you do, which is that this team keeps on getting better until the day comes that it goes to the SB and *wins* it.
Post Reply