The Minnesota Vikings are OFFICIALLY Scary!!

[Texas Vike]

First you're in denial about Ponder being good and now you're in denial about Harvin being his security blanket? We need to get you into a "denialoholics anonymous" program or something asap lol. But it's not a bad thing, I would say most QB's have a "security blanket" or a go to guy. To deny that is ridiculous.

Security blanket? Ponder played better after Percy was injured. There goes your theory.

[Reignman]

Security blanket? Ponder played better after Percy was injured. There goes your theory.

Well 1st, it's debatable if he played better without Percy, but that's neither here nor there. A "security blanket" really has no bearing on performance, it's more of a comfort thing. The amount of times Ponder targeted Harvin and Harvins receptions are more indicative of him being a security blanket. So my theory has returned And 2nd ... I forgot my 2nd ... oh yeah, ummm, it was never a theory to begin with lol. I just said it was ridiculous to deny the fact that most QB's have a "go to guy" aka a "security blanket". And 3rd, saying Ponder has a security blanket wasn't meant to be insulting. I just think he relied too much on Harvin, and as I said earlier, it probably helped his development when Harvin went down.

[Purple bruise]

Right That is not what you said or seemed to be saying at all. You dislike Ponder's , thats cool, you have lots of company and will all be proven wrong

[Mothman]

Bahaha you guys are hilarious. When's the next Ponder support group meeting? And what if Saturn doesn't align with Venus during the vernal equinox? Yeah we get it, anything can go wrong to excuse another poor season by Ponder...

That wasn't the point I was making at all. My point was that the Vikings are a football team and those who keep trying to make their success or failure hinge on the performance of one player are missing or ignoring that bigger picture. Ponder could have a great season and they could struggle to get to .500. He could have a season comparable to last year's and they could win 12 games. It's not "all on Ponder". Football just doesn't work that way.

And how would you know that, do you have a copy of the Vikings playbook at home?When your QB is throwing A LOT of short passes, it's a safe bet to assume he's checking down a lot.

That's not an accurate statement. It's not hard to tell the difference between a checkdown and a bubble screen, slant or some other short passing play designed to get the ball out of the QB's hands quickly. Most of the short passes thrown to Harvin fit into that category. A checkdown is, by definition, an option the QB takes when other options are unavailable and it rarely goes to a WR. It's usually thrown to a back or TE. If the QB threw the pass quickly, before looking for other open receivers, it probably wasn't a checkdown.

But for arguments sake, lets say all those short passes were by design ... does it make you feel better knowing we have so many designed short plays when we'd be better off with a QB or playbook that could take advantage of the stacked boxes and all the single coverage that AD gives us?

That statement ignores the most important ingredient necessary to take advantage of single coverage on the outside: receivers who can beat it.

I still don't understand the obsession some people have with those short passes. They were effective! Harvin was putting himself into MVP contention catching all those awful short passes. He was among the league's most productive receivers before he was injured. That doesn't suggest a strategy that was put in place to compensate for a QB's shortcomings but a strategy put in place because it would work... and it did.

I mean either the offense is dumbed down because the coaches are trying to compensate for the QB's shortcomings or our coaches are clueless. It's not good either way. Hey guys, I have a great idea, most of the defenders are going to be near the line or cheating up all the time because of AD, so lets throw a lot of short passes by design.

See above, they worked.

You're greatly oversimplifying things.

[VikingPaul73]

keep one key aspect in mind mothman, jennings had favre and rodgers throwing to him. its not about what jennings can do; its about what ponder can do (or not do) this season.

This is true and is a fair point. However, he's also never played with a running game with defenses consistently putting 8 in the box. Granted, AR is a FAAAAAAAAAAR superior QB, but Jennings should also have a lot more single coverages than he did in GB.

But I am worried that Jennings will get really frustrated in this offense.....block for AD, block for AD,block for AD, block for AD, block for AD, block for AD...finally a pass - single coverage- WIDE OPEN- ugh Ponder throws it in the stands, block for AD, block for AD.....

[Mothman]

This is true and is a fair point. However, he's also never played with a running game with defenses consistently putting 8 in the box. Granted, AR is a FAAAAAAAAAAR superior QB, but Jennings should also have a lot more single coverages than he did in GB.

But I am worried that Jennings will get really frustrated in this offense.....block for AD, block for AD,block for AD, block for AD, block for AD, block for AD...finally a pass - single coverage- WIDE OPEN- ugh Ponder throws it in the stands, block for AD, block for AD.....

They don't run Peterson quite that much. They ran him heavily down the stretch last season but he averaged about 22 carries per game over the course of the entire season.

They signed Jennings to use him. I suspect he'll be featured in the offense, not neglected.

[Reignman]

Right That is not what you said or seemed to be saying at all. You dislike Ponder's , thats cool, you have lots of company and will all be proven wrong

And I would like to see this crystal ball of yours haha. But I hope you're right because I don't want to start this 4 year grooming project all over again, and so soon.

That wasn't the point I was making at all. My point was that the Vikings are a football team and those who keep trying to make their success or failure hinge on the performance of one player are missing or ignoring that bigger picture. Ponder could have a great season and they could struggle to get to .500. He could have a season comparable to last year's and they could win 12 games. It's not "all on Ponder". Football just doesn't work that way.

Well whether you want to acknowledge it or not, the success of your team hinges greatly on the performance of your QB. It's much harder for a team to make up for the failure of a QB than it is any other position.

That's not an accurate statement. It's not hard to tell the difference between a checkdown and a bubble screen, slant or some other short passing play designed to get the ball out of the QB's hands quickly. Most of the short passes thrown to Harvin fit into that category. A checkdown is, by definition, an option the QB takes when other options are unavailable and it rarely goes to a WR. It's usually thrown to a back or TE. If the QB threw the pass quickly, before looking for other open receivers, it probably wasn't a checkdown.

Come on now, we can't use standard QB definitions when we're talking about Ponder. I wouldn't be surprised if his first read was the check down on many plays xD.

That statement ignores the most important ingredient necessary to take advantage of single coverage on the outside: receivers who can beat it.

Ha, yeah I know, see section B) of the Ponder apologists handbook.

I still don't understand the obsession some people have with those short passes. They were effective! Harvin was putting himself into MVP contention catching all those awful short passes. He was among the league's most productive receivers before he was injured. That doesn't suggest a strategy that was put in place to compensate for a QB's shortcomings but a strategy put in place because it would work... and it did.

Yeah in large part because Harvin was a beast that could move piles. But it didn't always work. When teams caught on and shutdown our short game (like at Detroit) Ponder was next to useless.

You're greatly oversimplifying things.

Nah I think you're over complicating things, see Occam's Razor. Sometimes the simplest explanation is the correct explanation.

Me: Look at that, Ponder pissed on the toilet seat.
You: If the manufacturer had made the hole bigger, or if whoever used the toilet before Ponder had lifted the seat, or if his mother had potty trained him better, he probably wouldn't have peed on the seat.

[VikingPaul73]

They don't run Peterson quite that much. They ran him heavily down the stretch last season but he averaged about 22 carries per game over the course of the entire season.

They signed Jennings to use him. I suspect he'll be featured in the offense, not neglected.

OK so I exaggerated a bit
But seriously, its clearly a different offense than the pass-happy system with an elite QB in GB.
Hopefully the 8 man fronts will be enough to offset the reduced attempts and the talent difference at QB.

[Mothman]

Well whether you want to acknowledge it or not, the success of your team hinges greatly on the performance of your QB. It's much harder for a team to make up for the failure of a QB than it is any other position.

I agree but saying a QB is important to a team's success or failure isn't the same as placing responsibility for that success or failure on his shoulders alone. The point isn't that Ponder is unimportant but that team success is not "all on Ponder".

Come on now, we can't use standard QB definitions when we're talking about Ponder. I wouldn't be surprised if his first read was the check down on many plays xD.

I assume you're joking.

Yeah in large part because Harvin was a beast that could move piles.But it didn't always work. When teams caught on and shutdown our short game (like at Detroit) Ponder was next to useless.

Nothing "always" works. The point is: it worked and it was a method of getting the ball into the hands of a player who was dangerous with it but who was not the best route runner. There have been numerous articles about the need to manufacture touches for Harvin and that's exactly what the Vikes were doing. Ripping Ponder for doing his job and throwing those passes is just silly. It's like ripping Tom Brady for repeatedly throwing short passes to Wes Welker. That sort of strategy has been effective in the NFL since the days of Walsh's 49er teams, arguably longer.

Nah I think you're over complicating things, see Occam's Razor. Sometimes the simplest explanation is the correct explanation.

... and sometimes it's just the simpleminded explanation (no offense intended— I'm just saying we need to look deeper than the simple "QB blame game"). I'd argue that the simplest, most logical explanation for a passing game that wasn't consistently effective is that there were problems throughout the passing game, not just at one position and even a cursory viewing of the games makes it pretty clear that's an accurate assessment. Your crass toilet analogy aside, blaming Ponder and ignoring other factors is just denying evidence for the sake of justifying criticism. Make all the jokes about Ponder apologists you want but the truth is there were QB problems, receiving provblems and blocking problems and they all contributed to a number of sub-par performances by the passing offense. Any other assessment simply ignores the facts.

We ALL know Ponder needs to get better but he's not incompetent. The irony in the "it's all on Ponder" talk and the posts about how crucial QBs are to team success is that the Vikes won 10 games last year with Ponder at QB. They were successful with this player who is supposedly holding them back. Oh, I know, that was all because of the talent around him. Last season, they carried him but THIS year, it's all on him.

It's nonsense, I tell ya!

[Mothman]

OK so I exaggerated a bit
But seriously, its clearly a different offense than the pass-happy system with an elite QB in GB.
Hopefully the 8 man fronts will be enough to offset the reduced attempts and the talent difference at QB.

I hope so but I think people overlook how much the system and personnel impact the perception of the QB. Don't get me wrong, there's no doubt Rodgers is an elite QB and there's no doubt he's much better than Ponder at this point but he also plays in a very QB-friendly, pass-happy system, with a terrific group of WRs that have spent most or all of their careers with him. That combination of talent, experience and strategy yields big passing numbers and in this fantasy football-centric era, numbers are what everybody wants to see. Numbers impress. however, other than a handful of egomaniacal players who are all about getting on Sportscenter, I think what players want most is to win. I'm sure they love putting up impressive stats but Jennings strikes me as the type of player who will be more than happy to catch 60 passes a season if his team is winning and seriously competing for the big prize.

[mondry]

Arian Foster had more carries in 2012, the year before that Maurice jones drew had more carries than Peterson, and the year before that michael turner had the most carries in the league. It seems we use peterson about as much as most other teams that feature power running games or elite backs.

[Just Me]

Bahaha you guys are hilarious. When's the next Ponder support group meeting? And what if Saturn doesn't align with Venus during the vernal equinox?

They didn't - Saturn's Right Ascension was approximately 21H 02M at Equinox and Venus was approximately 1H 41M. About 70 degrees apart

[PacificNorseWest]

When's the next Ponder support group meeting?

Whoa! We doin' this? Someone message me with the details. I'll be there!

[losperros]

Interesting! I'll actually be surprised if Harvin ever eclipses Jennings' best seasons. I can definitely see Percy pulling down more than 80 catches (Jennings' high) but I think his game will have to change and develop quite a bit if he's ever going to have an 80+ catch season where he averages 16+ yards per catch, scores 12 TDs and has more than 1200 yards receiving. He's extremely productive when heavily featured in the offense but when he's featured so much, he tends to get banged up. If he's not featured enough, he obviously won't get the touches necessary to have such a big season.

Sorry to be late in jumping in on this but somehow I missed it earlier.

Injuries aside, I don't understand any comparison between Jennings and Harvin. It isn't just systems or QBs that separate them. They're two different players with two completely different takes on they play the game of football. Jim, you might be surprised if Harvin ever eclipses Jennings' best seasons and I wouldn't argue with you. But I'll be more than shocked if Jennings runs the ball out of the backfield for the Vikings or leads the NFL four straight years in KO returns the way Harvin did. That doesn't make Jennings less of a player, just a different one. And vice versa for Harvin and Jennings as receivers.

On another note, the Vikings didn't sign Jennings to replace Harvin. They drafted Patterson to fill the void left by Harvin's departure. The team needed a smart and talented guy like Jennings (with or without Harvin) and I thought it was a wise move for them to acquire him. As for Harvin, he wanted out so the Vikings justifiably made the trade, which beats the heck out of just cutting him (as that idiot Childress might have done).

[mansquatch]

Los Perros nailed it on Harvin, the trade, and the WR group. Lost in that debate is the fact there in addition to his route running prowess, GJ is a very high character guy in the locker room. PH may not be a locker room cancer, but it is obvious at this point that he is a bit of primadonna. That difference might be subtle, but it is a difference and it will matter.

As far as Ponder, I'll reiterate what I said before. Ponder has shown he can make the plays we need him to make. His issue is doing it consistently and that is his big challenge in 2013. Beyond that is just speculation and fan fervor.