Vikings Message Board.Com

saint33 wrote:I guess I just don't see it as very ballsy to stay with the hot hand, especially when that hot hand is being groomed as the future of the franchise. Kaepernick had yet to have a dropoff from his excellent play, so why go back to Alex Smith? Kaepernick clearly brought something to the 9ers offense that Smith simply could not.

IMO to me it was a no brainer, a decision most coaches would make in the same situation, it makes no sense not to.

No, I understand why you don't. The reason I do is because Kaepernick's hot hand could have easily cooled after that Bears game. It would have been really interesting to see what would have happened had Colin struggled after a couple games of playing well.

Demi wrote:And if Webb had played well in place of Ponder with the injury? Or if TJoke goes down and Gus does well enough to win some games? "Can't lose your job because of injury" that's the kind of garbage our by the book old school coaches of recent history would use.

Much less replacing an offensive coordinator during the season like the other Harbaugh!

First of all, TJoke did get replaced by Gus, and not even due to injury.

And second of all the comparison's you used are apples to oranges. Alex Smith was the 49ers' spot gap QB, not their franchise QB. Kaepernick was drafted to be the franchise guy, he's younger and cheaper. Once Alex Smith falters or gets injured, it's very easy for the coaches to make the permanent change to Kaepernick when he performs the way he did, because they are bound to make the switch at some point, this is just the catalyst to the change.

In your example, the coaches have to make a much more difficult decision of going from the player they've drafted to be the franchise QB to a QB who is not a long term option, for short term success, potentially stunting the growth or causing a rift for the future QB.

HardcoreVikesFan wrote: No, I understand why you don't. The reason I do is because Kaepernick's hot hand could have easily cooled after that Bears game. It would have been really interesting to see what would have happened had Colin struggled after a couple games of playing well.

yes, it would definitely have been interesting. But it is actually why I don't find this move in particular all that difficult, they had the opportunity to ride the hot hand as long as it stayed hot, and they've never had to second guess it since the hot hand has not cooled.

80 PurplePride 84 wrote: The one time the Vikings went with a hot hand after he replaced an injured QB it made for a disastrous playoff performance.

That "hot hand" wasn't indeed very hot. Tjack was coming off a very subpar performance against the Giants entering the playoffs.

Demi wrote:And if Webb had played well in place of Ponder with the injury? Or if TJoke goes down and Gus does well enough to win some games? "Can't lose your job because of injury" that's the kind of garbage our by the book old school coaches of recent history would use.

Much less replacing an offensive coordinator during the season like the other Harbaugh!

But Webb didn't play well. To me in our situation the coaches ballsy decision was to stay with Ponder and not dump him after the poor performances mid season. It wouldn't have been ballsy to try Webb out and see what he could do. It seemed that a lot of the fans were calling for the change, But the staff made the call to ignore the hue and cry and stay with Ponder. In San Fran Kapernick played very well in replacing Smith. Still different in my book

Mark Craig should not be allowed to write anymore sports related articles. We don't compare at all to the 49ers, much less favorably. We drafted some players and they drafted some players, but the most amazing thing is how both teams employ an 11 players on the field at the same time scheme. Wow, I can't believe I never noticed how identical we are to a super bowl team .

The headline is about how we compare favorably then he proceeds to talk about not only how different we are, but how we still have a ways to go. Oh wait, that's right, we beat them in week 3, and by the rules of the NFL that means we're better. Whoop-de-damn-do, the Cardinals beat the Patriots in week 2, so by that logic I guess they're pretty damn good. Yeah, this isn't boxing, and too bad we have this other thing called "any given Sunday".

I don't even see how we're on the road to becoming just like the Niners. We have similar OL's, DL's, and DB's? Well I guess we don't need to worry about finding a QB, LB's, or WR's. We just need to sit back and wonder what upcoming super bowl the league will schedule us to play. I just can't wait to read Craigs next article on how Ponder compares favorably to Brady because both are married and right handed.

saint33 wrote:Alex Smith was the 49ers' spot gap QB, not their franchise QB. Kaepernick was drafted to be the franchise guy, he's younger and cheaper.

Alex Smith was drafted 1st overall in 2005 so he was meant to be their franchise QB and not just a stop gap. Kaepernick wasn't drafted until the 2nd round (36th overall). Gabbert, Locker, Ponder, and Mallet were all still on the board when they drafted in the 1st round, so I'm not so sure they intended to make Kaepernick their franchise guy. Plus Smith was finally starting to play well. They went DE (Aldon Smith) in the 1st round. It was a damn good pick however and everything worked out for them.

Reignman wrote:Mark Craig should not be allowed to write anymore sports related articles. We don't compare at all to the 49ers, much less favorably. We drafted some players and they drafted some players, but the most amazing thing is how both teams employ an 11 players on the field at the same time scheme. Wow, I can't believe I never noticed how identical we are to a super bowl team .

The headline is about how we compare favorably then he proceeds to talk about not only how different we are, but how we still have a ways to go. Oh wait, that's right, we beat them in week 3, and by the rules of the NFL that means we're better. Whoop-de-damn-do, the Cardinals beat the Patriots in week 2, so by that logic I guess they're pretty damn good. Yeah, this isn't boxing, and too bad we have this other thing called "any given Sunday".

I don't even see how we're on the road to becoming just like the Niners. We have similar OL's, DL's, and DB's? Well I guess we don't need to worry about finding a QB, LB's, or WR's. We just need to sit back and wonder what upcoming super bowl the league will schedule us to play. I just can't wait to read Craigs next article on how Ponder compares favorably to Brady because both are married and right handed.

Not on the right path to being a top team like the 49er's even The Vikes have among the best special teams in the league, the best running back, the best fullback, the most dynamic offensive player (Harvin) in the league. Add to that an all pro tight end, all pro outside linebacker, the best young left tackle in the game, an excellent center, winfield and an up and coming corner in Cooke. One of the youngest, best, hardest hitting strong safety in the league (Smith). Jarred Allen, Brian Robison, Kevin Williams, Griffin. A great GM and great owner. Plus, and I know that you discounted the fact that they beat the 49er's handily but they did. Won their last four tough, crucial games to make the play-offs, when no one gave them a chance. And saw a young QB finally starting to play like the way he is capable, witness winning his last four games and posting a 120 QB rating with 3 tds and no ints.
YOU ARE PROBABLY RIGHT THIS TEAM COULDN'T HOLD THE 49ER'S JOCK STRAPS

Reignman wrote:Alex Smith was drafted 1st overall in 2005 so he was meant to be their franchise QB and not just a stop gap. Kaepernick wasn't drafted until the 2nd round (36th overall). Gabbert, Locker, Ponder, and Mallet were all still on the board when they drafted in the 1st round, so I'm not so sure they intended to make Kaepernick their franchise guy. Plus Smith was finally starting to play well. They went DE (Aldon Smith) in the 1st round. It was a damn good pick however and everything worked out for them.

Alex smith was drafted to be the franchise qb. However he also was drafted 6 years before kaepernick, and 3 head coaches before, while struggling the whole time before harbaugh came in. The original investment they made in him was no longer restricting the organization at the time harbaugh was hired. When kaepernick was drafted, smith had been resigned to a one year contract. This regime traded up in the 2nd to draft him, and suggesting that they passed on Qbs in the first proves they didn't view him as a franchise qb is silly, considering cincinnati did the same with dalton, and I don't think anyone would suggest dalton was not drafted to be their franchise qb.

They traded up to invest a high draft pick in the kid, he was very clearly drafted to be the qb of the future. However he was a raw "project" type of prospect, and the team wanted a veteran qb to stop gap while kaepernick progressed. Smith was signed as an insurance policy and the fact that he played well in the process was a bonus. Because of it they were never forced to try their hand with Colin, but when the time came that he was forced into a starting role, he was given every opportunity to keep it because he was the franchise qb. The decision to stick with him was really in everyone in the organizations best interest as long as he could produce, which he did. It's really that simple, as long as he played at a level equal to or higher then smith, they had no reason to go back to smith, because kaepernick was being groomed as the qb of the future, and is financially more appealing

Reignman wrote:Mark Craig should not be allowed to write anymore sports related articles. We don't compare at all to the 49ers, much less favorably. We drafted some players and they drafted some players, but the most amazing thing is how both teams employ an 11 players on the field at the same time scheme. Wow, I can't believe I never noticed how identical we are to a super bowl team .

The headline is about how we compare favorably then he proceeds to talk about not only how different we are, but how we still have a ways to go. Oh wait, that's right, we beat them in week 3, and by the rules of the NFL that means we're better. Whoop-de-damn-do, the Cardinals beat the Patriots in week 2, so by that logic I guess they're pretty damn good. Yeah, this isn't boxing, and too bad we have this other thing called "any given Sunday".

I don't even see how we're on the road to becoming just like the Niners. We have similar OL's, DL's, and DB's? Well I guess we don't need to worry about finding a QB, LB's, or WR's. We just need to sit back and wonder what upcoming super bowl the league will schedule us to play. I just can't wait to read Craigs next article on how Ponder compares favorably to Brady because both are married and right handed.

I believe the comparison was not meant to suggest that we are identical or that we are better (or even equals). Its nitpicking to compare each individual position and prove the differences. The article is referencing the similarities in philosophies, of not only the strategies on how to build the team, but also the philosophy the teams in compass on the field. The 9ers are a team built through solid drafting, and solid coaching to get the most out if thier youthful core. And they are a team built on hard nosed football, which believes in winning the battle at the lines, playing strong defense and establishing the run. The same philosophies our team is built on, as opposed to say the packers who are a much more spread open team which relies more on its skill positions than its line play. This is the similarities he's referring too, and trying to allude that the 9ers embody the finished product our franchise is aiming to achieve.

Adding in the fact that we beat them at their own game is simply pointing out that while we are not done in our building process, we are on the right track and of we continue with our same philosphies, we will be able to field a team as strong as the 9ers' current squad. And that they template which our team is being built upon has proven to work

Purple bruise wrote:YOU ARE PROBABLY RIGHT THIS TEAM COULDN'T HOLD THE 49ER'S JOCK STRAPS

Haha now you're getting it. All kidding aside, I'm not saying this team isn't headed in the right direction, but we're nowhere near being the same caliber team that the Niners are despite beating them in week 3. Like I said, any given Sunday. I mean if the Niners win the super bowl the league isn't going to say, "well the Vikings beat them in week 3 so we should give them rings too". The current Niners team would beat the current Vikings team 9 out of 10 times. And besides the Giants and Seahawks beat them more handily than we did.

I think AD's 2100 yards have given Viking fans a false sense of how good this TEAM is and probably a false sense of how good the QB is. We can't count on AD to rush for 2000 yards every year so this TEAM is farther away from being a contender than most people think. Especially if Ponder doesn't pan out. How long will it take to find and groom another QB?

I have no confidence that Ponder is the answer and I have no confidence Frazier's run first and stop the run philosophy can succeed in what is now a passing league. I mean really? We have the likes of Rodgers and Stafford in our division but our priority is to stop their non existent running attack? Color me optimistic.

Reignman wrote:Oh wait, that's right, we beat them in week 3, and by the rules of the NFL that means we're better. Whoop-de-damn-do, the Cardinals beat the Patriots in week 2, so by that logic I guess they're pretty damn good. Yeah, this isn't boxing, and too bad we have this other thing called "any given Sunday".

Any given Sunday? How about 10 of them? Did the Cardinals win 10 games this year too? I must have missed that... ( I think the Vikings would have been 16-0 except for 6 "any given Sundays.")

Look - If the Vikings were as good as the 49ers, we'd be playing Baltimore this Sunday, and we're not. No one is asserting that. But to diminish the Vikings victory where we were in control from start to finish goes beyond "any given Sunday." The fact is: the Vikings wouldn't even have had a whiff of a victory in that game 1 or 2 years ago, and the fact the Vikings won is almost irrelevant (believe it or not). The relevant fact is: they played like they deserved to win for the ENTIRE game. The final score confirmed it at the end of the day.

Are the Vikings as good as the 9ers? IMHO - "No" (Not yet). Next year? I wouldn't bet the farm against it....

Reignman wrote:I have no confidence that Ponder is the answer and I have no confidence Frazier's run first and stop the run philosophy can succeed in what is now a passing league.

That's the main point of the comparison to the 49ers: they show that philosophy still works. It worked well for the Vikings last year too. They just aren't quite balanced or talented enough yet to take that philosophy and go deeper into the playoffs.

This year's Super Bowl shows that all the talk in recent years about how teams must have a QB at the level of Brady, Rodgers, Brees, etc. to win it all is bunk. Neither the 49ers or the Ravens have a QB like that. These aren't teams built to pass, pass, pass in a passing league.

I mean really? We have the likes of Rodgers and Stafford in our division but our priority is to stop their non existent running attack?

It's their first priority, not their sole priority. Good defense starts at the line and it starts with stopping the run. A team that can't do that is usually dead in the water once they come up against a team that can run the ball against them, unless that team is severely deficient in another area. It's easier to stop any offense if you can make it one-dimensional.

Mothman wrote: That's the main point of the comparison to the 49ers: they show that philosophy still works. It worked well for the Vikings last year too. They just aren't quite balanced or talented enough yet to take that philosophy and go deeper into the playoffs.

This year's Super Bowl shows that all the talk in recent years about how teams must have a QB at the level of Brady, Rodgers, Brees, etc. to win it all is bunk. Neither the 49ers or the Ravens have a QB like that. These aren't teams built to pass, pass, pass in a passing league.

I pretty much agree with you, Jim, but after watching the Super Bowl, I have to admit that both the Ravens and Niners do have elite QBs as starters. They may play differently than Rodgers, Brady, Brees or whoever, but Flacco and Kaepernick are big time forces on the field and I wish the Vikings had one of them.

Can Ponder step up to their level? Well, it would help if he had Anquan Boldin or Michael Crabtree in the team's WR corps along with Harvin. Even so, I think the Vikings do need a top caliber QB at the helm to compete in the playoffs and make it to the Super Bowl. In that way I now kind of disagree with the article. The Niners and the Vikings have some similarities and their approach to building a team is practically identical. But I feel the Niners did go to the SB on the arm of one heck of a QB in Kaepernick and they certainly have a formidable passing attack.

losperros wrote:I pretty much agree with you, Jim, but after watching the Super Bowl, I have to admit that both the Ravens and Niners do have elite QBs as starters. They may play differently than Rodgers, Brady, Brees or whoever, but Flacco and Kaepernick are big time forces on the field and I wish the Vikings had one of them.

I know what you mean, Craig, and that's why I specifically left the word elite out of my post. At this point, I'm not sure there's anything close to agreement on what constitutes an elite NFL QB. However, when most people talk about teams needing an elite QB to win the Super Bowl, I get the feeling what they are really talking about is a QB with prolific passing numbers, a 4500+ yard passer who throws for 30+ TDs in a season. I think it's clear that a team doesn't need a QB producing like that to win it all but they do need a QB who is (as you phrased it above) a big time force on the field.

Can Ponder step up to their level? Well, it would help if he had Anquan Boldin or Michael Crabtree in the team's WR corps along with Harvin. Even so, I think the Vikings do need a top caliber QB at the helm to compete in the playoffs and make it to the Super Bowl. In that way I now kind of disagree with the article. The Niners and the Vikings have some similarities and their approach to building a team is practically identical. But I feel the Niners did go to the SB on the arm of one heck of a QB in Kaepernick and they certainly have a formidable passing attack.

They do but they also have a relatively complete team. I don't know if Ponder can step up and play at a Super Bowl-winning level or not but I do know he can't do so without a good enough team around him and I suspect you'd agree with that. Flacco's offensive teammates enable him to be successful and the same goes for any QB. I'm convinced the best way to find out if Ponder is the man for the job or not is to address some of the other problems on the team and see how much difference that makes. Give him better protection, give him better receivers and if he doesn't raise his game with better tools to work with, that will be a very bad sign. If he does... maybe they'll be Super Bowl bound in a year or two.