Vikings Message Board.Com

Mothman wrote: A tweet from Souhan isn't strong evidence of anything other what he thinks he saw. I remember seeing that tweet in the game thread as I heard the broadcast crew describe that same play as a coverage sack, saying Ponder had nowhere to go with the ball. I haven't seen the play yet so I have no idea which, if either, interpretation is accurate but the film will provide actual evidence.

Jim,

I'm more disturbed about what I saw from the rest of the team, because Ponder is Ponder, but other folks seem to have taken a step back. I'm especially scared about the O-Line and the D-Line.

As for Ponder, he is unwatchable. Just unwatchable. Honestly, you're my age -- you have better things to do than watch a guy play QB like that on Sunday afternoons. Between him and the D, it wasn't a fun game to watch even when we were winning.

CalVike wrote: Fans always overreact to a pathetic loss especially in Game 1 when optimism is at its highest, myself included. The problem I have with Ponder on the Simpson circus catch was that Simpson was wide open and it should have been the easiest TD pass of his career.

The catch I saw wasn't a circus catch and even the announcer on the broadcast (was it Billick? I only caught a few plays with the sound on) referred to it as a nice throw. There were two long completions to Simpson in this game, correct? I get the impression we aren't talking about the same pass.

Souhan ain't no damn analyst. He's a writer.

Confirmation bias is strroonnnnggg.

Mothman wrote: The catch I saw wasn't a circus catch and even the announcer on the broadcast (was it Billick? I only caught a few plays with the sound on) referred to it as a nice throw. There were two long completions to Simpson in this game, correct? I get the impression we aren't talking about the same pass.

One was nice drop into Simpson, other one was a circus catch, but like you said before its only play and trust me it was his only good throw of the game ONLY.

PacificNorseWest wrote:Souhan ain't no damn analyst. He's a writer.

Confirmation bias is strroonnnnggg.

Either way you miss the point, someone other than me and "a Ponder hater" seen Ponder miss an open guy, and it happens all the time.

Mothman wrote: The catch I saw wasn't a circus catch and even the announcer on the broadcast (was it Billick? I only caught a few plays with the sound on) referred to it as a nice throw. There were two long completions to Simpson in this game, correct? I get the impression we aren't talking about the same pass.

No, different pass. Bilick even said it was a pretty bad pass and great catch by Simpson on the other one.

allday1991 wrote:Are we asking to much as fans for our QB to be able to see the open guy and hit WRs in stride? I have given two exact examples where I believe Ponder isn't seeing the open WR, and all you can chalk it up to is something about a coverage sack?

That's not what I did at all. I said Souhan's opinion wasn't evidence and it isn't... it's just an opinion. I haven't seen the play. I don't have an opinion on what happened, just conflicting views of it from different sources.

On the play from the SF game, I gave you my recollection of the play which was that Ponder was under pressure and that his line of sight to AD on the play was through the oncoming rush. The fact that he reacted to the pressure and threw a TD is a positive, not a negative. I acknowledge that Ponder sometimes fails to see open receivers and to hit receivers in stride.

I was talking about the Sport writing noticing Ponder not seeing the open guy, What does that have to do with a Former linebacker calling it a coverage sack, maybe he was listening on the radio to and not watching the game so he cant see the open guy like the majority of people on this board do.

He was doing the radio broadcast of the game. He's the color man for the Vikings radio broadcasts. In other words, he's a former NFL player who had a great view of the play from the booth and it's his job to comment on the plays and assess what he believes happened. That doesn't mean he's always right but I see no reason to assume Souhan's assessment of the play was more accurate.

Watch the Rudolph TD again...

Provide a link and I'll be happy to watch it.

Mothman wrote: The catch I saw wasn't a circus catch and even the announcer on the broadcast (was it Billick? I only caught a few plays with the sound on) referred to it as a nice throw. There were two long completions to Simpson in this game, correct? I get the impression we aren't talking about the same pass.

There were two that I recall. The first was a good throw. It was the one where the Lion defender was flagged for PI. The second was overthrown but catchable. The Lions challenged and lost. It is the second that I refer to. Circus catch may indeed be an overstatement. Big picture point, if he hits the wide open Simpson in stride on that play, easy TD.

CalVike wrote:There were two that I recall. The first was a good throw. It was the one where the Lion defender was flagged for PI.

That's the play I'm talking about. It was down the right sideline in the first half, on the same drive where Rudolph had a catch for a big gain. I haven't seen the other pass yet.

The second was overthrown but catchable. The Lions challenged and lost. It is the second that I refer to. Circus catch may indeed be an overstatement. Big picture point, if he hits the wide open Simpson in stride on that play, easy TD.

I had a feeling we were talking about different plays! I'll take a close look at that one tomorrow when I watch the game.

Mothman wrote:I had a feeling we were talking about different plays! I'll take a close look at that one tomorrow when I watch the game.

They showed the play on Vikes highlights on Football Night in America if you happen to TiVo that show.

Mothman wrote:
On the play from the SF game, I gave you my recollection of the play which was that Ponder was under pressure and that his line of sight to AD on the play was through the oncoming rush. The fact that he reacted to the pressure and threw a TD is a positive, not a negative. I acknowledge that Ponder sometimes fails to see open receivers and to hit receivers in stride.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfmLkMLzcaI , here is a link, like I said he does have pressure before there is a clear throwing path to a.p. My problem with the play is that I don't see it as a positive , he missed the open guy and forced it into good coverage and lucky it wasn't intercepted or incomplete, I don't see how you could give anyone but Rudolph credit for making that play.

CalVike wrote: They showed the play on Vikes highlights on Football Night in America if you happen to TiVo that show.

I didn't but I'll see it tomorrow. I don't doubt your assessment of it anyway.

I am also a hockey fan and whether it is Football or Hockey, or I am sure any sport, there are examples of players who, based on their physical skills were questionable if they would even make the league but went on to become leaders due to their passion for the game while others who should have been stars did not even make the league. I don't see the passion or urgency within Ponder and even in his press conference it did not seem to be there

Mothman wrote:Fans don't just want Ponder to be better, they want him to be perfect and since he's a long, long way from perfect, even his successes are considered failures. A TD pass isn't enough. A deep completion isn't enough because it could have been a TD and it wasn't thrown perfectly. It never ends...

Jim, I hate to say it, but given today's performance by Ponder, your comment is pretty unfair.

Yes, we want him to be better. I, for one, would accept almost any degree of better. But the brutal reality of today ... he wasn't. Not even close. Honestly, he was pretty horrible.

When you see the replay, you'll understand what we're talking about.

allday1991 wrote: Either way you miss the point, someone other than me and "a Ponder hater" seen Ponder miss an open guy, and it happens all the time.

Ponder didn't even see 90% of the open guys.