Vikings Message Board.Com

Mothman wrote: Yes, I know but I honestly don't care. Thank you for saying I normally think and post with a sound mind. That's a nice compliment and it's certainly something i try to do!

I wouldn't describe my feelings about Favre as "hate" so if they've come off that way, I've done a poor job of communicating them. I'll admit that after rooting against him for 16 years, I wasn't exactly eager to cheer for him but if the Vikes could sign Aaron Rodgers tomorrow, I wouldn't care one iota that he'd spent his entire pro career up to this point as a Packer because unlike Favre, he's in his prime with what should be many good years ahead of him. I don't care that Jennings was a Packer, I didn't care that Longwell was a Packer, etc. That really doesn't matter.

My problem with the Vikings signing Favre was, ironically, similar to the problem many people have with Ponder. I thought it was ultimately a waste of time and I still think it was a waste of time. I never believed the combination of Favre and Childress could lead the Vikings to a Super Bowl win and as much as everybody loved that 2009 season, that turned out to be an accurate assessment. Favre was an old band-aid that just pushed the effort to find a long-term solution at QB back two years and delayed a rebuilding process that should have begun earlier. Instead, in an effort to "win now", the team held onto aging players too long and managed personnel in a way that led directly to the dismal 3-13 season that followed. Several of us saw that fall coming a year or two earlier which just made it all the more frustrating.

So, I'd like to believe I'm thinking rationally about Favre as well. I definitely don't hate the man. I just disliked the decision to sign him and absolutely hated the decision to bring him back in 2010. In the long run, despite a really good season in 2009, I think it was bad for the team. I realize that in the end, committing to Ponder for 3 years could be bad for the Vikings too if the commitment doesn't pay off but I think taking a swing at developing a young QB is very different from using an aging stopgap. A team without a franchise QB has to either develop one or find one by other means. A 39 year old has no chance to be a franchise QB.

Now, I did hate the insane hype and the bizarre cult of hero worshippers that followed Favre to Minnesota but that wasn't Favre's fault...

Interesting post.

We typically see eye to eye, but on the Favre issue we're pretty different, even though I understand your reasoning completely.

I actually think he and Chilly balanced each other pretty well. Chilly needed an improvisor to just mess up his hyper-controlling ways. I looked at it this way: If we have to have Chilly, well I guess at least w/ Favre we'll have someone to counteract his bland and predictable tendencies. For much of the season it was a match in heaven.

This is a Ponder thread, though. The only argument from the glass half empty crew (aka the endless night posse) that makes sense to me is that Ponder, at his very best, will never be more than a game manager. This does scare me a bit, but even so, I firmly believe he deserves the reigns this season to continue his success from last year. And I define success as wins. Nothing else matters.

Poor QB's can't rattle off 4 wins once their safety net goes on injured reserve (Harvin) against tough competition in a do or die situation to make the playoffs.

They can when their running back is having a historic season, and in those 4 wins rushes for more yards than that poor QB passes for, and scores just as many TDs rushing as that poor QB scored passing.

In only one of those games was he more than along for the ride. Any number of QBs in this league, starting and backup, could do just as well, or better than Ponder.

And while we're taking shots at other QBs (Gabbert), I'm sure there are Jags fans who are just as delusional with Gabbert as some Ponder apologists are. Gabbert has the highest QBR in the league when given 5 seconds to pass! (Or whatever that silly stat was). And how about the weapons, or lack thereof, that he has? Hell he didn't even have his potential pro bowl HB last year! Ponder is over here throwing bubble screens to a pro bowl WR, check downs to a pro bowl tight end, handing the ball to a top 3 all time running back. Wonder how Ponder would look on the Jaguars last year?...People in glass houses and all that...

GBFavreFan wrote:The bigger question is how long will the Vikings wait for Ponder to take that "next step"? One more season? Two more? 8 games? If Ponder has failed to improve or shows miniscule or insignificant improvement, how much longer would the team keep Christian Ponder in the huddle?

What's what I want to know. Can anybody honestly say by this preseason has he has progressed? I don't see any improvement yet but without AD on the field it's hard to see. By week 6 we will see.

mansquatch wrote:I generally avoid feeding trolls, but it's Friday so what the heck.

Reignman, you have a history of Ponder dislike since joining this board. Good for you. However, I've yet to see you make a persuasive case based on evidence.

You apologists really do need to look up the word troll. Your constant misuse of the term is borderline embarrassing. But just exactly how does one persuade someone suffering from delusion? I've posted countless charts and stats that help support my case that Ponder is terrible, what more do you require? If I could get my hands on full game video's I would be more than happy to splice together a video montage of cringe worthy Ponder moments, however something tells me not even that would do much to persuade you. But perhaps you have me confused with another poster? Or maybe you're suffering from short term memory problems, a side effect of wearing the purple shades too tight, because I've dropped an abundance of Ponder evidence on this board in my short time here.

And while we're on the subject, I want to see the "evidence" that makes you believe Ponder is going to be anything more than a career backup. Oh, and you have to do it without using the words, potential, hope, belief, faith, or feeling because those are just empty words people use to make themselves feel better when there's no other rational reason to feel better. Besides, Ryan Leaf and JaMarcus Russell both had boat loads of potential. Everyone ever drafted had "potential".

Purple bruise wrote:You nailed that and I loved the way he blamed me for getting him into this topic and once again started his doomsday machine rolling
It is hard not to feed the trolls even when you do not want to

Well first, he didn't nail anything, and second, we all know you like to agree with what all the other apologists spew, but do you have an original thought of your own to contribute to the conversation? And stop patting yourself on the back, I never blamed you for getting me involved in this conversation, I merely pointed out your hypocrisy. I would have offered my opinion on this topic with or without your "doomsday" bait.

Mothman wrote:I'm just kidding. I think Mansquatch's underlying point was for Reignman to post a reasonable argument to support his views instead of just antagonizing or mocking people.

And I feel I've done more than an adequate job of just that. Whether you think my arguments are reasonable or not appears to depend greatly on which side of the Ponder argument you lie. The heavy sarcastic tone or antagonizing as you perceive, is just a bonus and the way I handle irrational posts. After all, Purple bruise and his ilk give me plenty of material to work with.

Mothman wrote:FOR
Ponder improved in nearly every statistical category from his first season to his second, made fewer mistakes and generally showed progress. He has demonstrated that he can utilize proper footwork, that his arm strength is sufficient to complete passes at all levels of the field, that he can deliver the ball accurately, etc. He has not developed sufficient consistency in these areas but as with many QBs, that should come with time.

It would appear so wouldn't it? I hate to throw an apologists own facts in his face .... oh who am I kidding, I love it xD ... when you take into consideration he only had 10 starts in 2011 and 16 in 2012, the improvement is negligible. Yeah go ahead, break his stats down by average per game and you'll see there's not really much of an improvement. Heck he even regressed in some categories, like yards per game, TD's per game and avg per attempt. And ofc he made fewer mistakes. After seeing what he couldn't do in 2011 they asked him to do a lot less in 2012. In other words take fewer chances and be more careful. We don't call him check down Charlie for nuttin. But I'm probably just talking out my #### again.

Purple bruise wrote:I would agree with these assesments but in the "for" column I would definately add the fact that he is quite mobile and is a threat to take off and run with the ball and pick up first downs with his legs (he has done this numerous times)

There you go, contributing on your own and what not, at a boy, I knew you could do it xD. See I can be complimentary when it's called for. And yeah he's mobile, but he panics and leaves the pocket way to early. Mobility is sometimes a QB's worst enemy because their first instinct is to run and that's not going to help them become a better passer. In the niners game you saw how the Vikings tried to force him to stay in the pocket. Something he should have learned by now. And that's not necessarily on Ponder, but Frazier and co.

mansquatch wrote:So for those saying he can't do it, they are basically saying we are going to get more, probably a lot more, Mr. Hyde than we got in 2013. Again Why?

Because we haven't seen anything that makes us believe we'll see more Mr. Jekyll? The handful of plays where he looks like he knows what he's doing aren't enough to make up for all the plays where he looks lost.

mondry wrote:For more perspective, let's look at passing attempts. He was 21st with 483 tries so he's already at a disadvantage compared to the top 20 making more attempts than him. Drew Brees for example threw the ball 187 more times than Ponder so there is no way he can compete stat wise to that. 7 other QB's threw it at least 100 times more than Ponder did! It's simple math when it comes down to it, Ponder is NEVER going to be above average in stats that require a high volume of attempts because he's NEVER going to get a HIGH enough volume to compete with them.

Oh silly goose. I see the problem here. You think I've failed basic math xD. When it comes to statistics I rarely look at totals without considering attempts. In how many posts have I harped on his 6.08 avg per attempt? How many times did I ridicule Ponder because he was on pace to be the first QB in NFL history to have a lower passing avg than his RB had rushing avg? He still finished with the lowest margin ever, but thanks to that 65yd gem to Wright in the final Packers game he would have finished below AD. Heck it was so bad I suggested we run the ball in our 2 minute drill because AD had a better chance of breaking one than Ponder did connecting deep. Oh and FYI, 8 of our 10 longest plays last year were AD runs, including the top 6, so I wasn't just being facetious. Bottom line, even his AVERAGES are alarming.

But more importantly, you should ask yourself why Ponder is NEVER going to get a HIGH volume of attempts. No I mean really think about it. We're not "run-first" team ONLY because we have AD. Part of the equation is because we have Flounder. The options are limited.

Purple bruise wrote:I certainly will not judge him based on the few quarters that he played in preseason.

You're on a roll . I'm not judging him on preseason alone. You can't forget how he played last year. The fact that he got limited time in preseason is a knock on Frazier and co, and I've made that pretty clear.

While we're on the subject, guess which QB's played in their teams 4th preseason game? Kaepernick, Dalton, Stafford, Eli Manning, and Russell Wilson. I guess a few coaches didn't get the memo on "standard operating procedure".

Mothman wrote:Shouldn't the hope be to have a winning QB on a championship team?

Your question is redundant as I don't know how you can have a losing QB on a championship team. But all that aside, as Melanie pointed out earlier, don't you think you could improve your championship odds "tremendously" if you go out and get the best guy possible at the position? Oh that's right, you're the guy that would take Ponder over Favre.

Mothman wrote:In the end, I want a QB who fits within the team's overall concept, executes the offense and leads them to victory.

Again, not to beat a dead horse, but apparently I have to keep pointing it out, our offensive "concept" or ideology has a lot to do with our anemic QB and his limitations. And if you don't believe that, then your denial runs deeper than even I imagine.

But never mind me, just trolling again

Since you asked for a definition here it is:

"Troll (Internet)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (

Sound familiar

Purple bruise wrote:Since you asked for a definition here it is:

"Troll (Internet)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (

Sound familiar

Yes, it does. It's too bad, because the overall spirit of this board is really good.

Reignman wrote:
Oh silly goose. I see the problem here. You think I've failed basic math xD. When it comes to statistics I rarely look at totals without considering attempts. In how many posts have I harped on his 6.08 avg per attempt? How many times did I ridicule Ponder because he was on pace to be the first QB in NFL history to have a lower passing avg than his RB had rushing avg? He still finished with the lowest margin ever, but thanks to that 65yd gem to Wright in the final Packers game he would have finished below AD. Heck it was so bad I suggested we run the ball in our 2 minute drill because AD had a better chance of breaking one than Ponder did connecting deep. Oh and FYI, 8 of our 10 longest plays last year were AD runs, including the top 6, so I wasn't just being facetious. Bottom line, even his AVERAGES are alarming.

Oh yeah what's 2+2?! ^_^ I was certain it was the YPA, as such I even said "oh here it is, his worst stat." Regardless, like I said it'll likely go up half a yard or so now that we have some actual receivers. You also have to take into account just how great of a season Adrian had. He's only the 3rd player EVER to have a 6.0 avg YPC with over 300 attempts and the first RB to do that in 15 years. The scary thing about that is he started off slow, for the last 10 games he was averaging 7.1 YPC, which is better than Mathew Stafford and Andrew Lucks YPA as well! 8 out of our 10 longest plays were AD runs? I bet Peterson would have at least 5 out of the 10 longest plays on just about any other team as well! Not many passing games are going to out do multiple 82 yard TD's

But more importantly, you should ask yourself why Ponder is NEVER going to get a HIGH volume of attempts. No I mean really think about it. We're not "run-first" team ONLY because we have AD. Part of the equation is because we have Flounder. The options are limited.

Because if Adrian keeps this up, we're not just a run-first team, we'll be THE BEST run first team in the history of the NFL. Like I said, in the last 10 games he was averaging 7.1 YPC, this is so far beyond special that it makes zero sense to get in his way. But it's not just Adrian Peterson, it's a coach that also believes in it, it's the offensive coordinator's offense, and we simply play defense.

Look at the top 10 for attempts and you'll see they are the opposite of us. Hardly any running game at all and a piss poor defense. #1 Mathew Stafford - Lions - No run game, no defense. #2 Drew Brees - saints - no run game, no defense. #3 Tony Romo - Dallas - below average run game, poor defense, #4 Tom Brady - Pats - average run game, poor defense. #5 Andrew Luck - Colts - no run game, poor defense. #6 Matt Ryan - Falcons - average run game, average defense. #7 Peyton Manning - Broncos - poor run game, average defense. #8 Carson Palmer - Oakland - poor run game poor defense. #9 Josh Freeman - TB - Great run game, no defense. #10 Aaron Rodgers - GB - no running game poor defense.

In most cases as well you can see some incredibly good to elite WR's fit into that mix. Calvin Johnson, Dez Bryant, Wes welker, Reggie Wayne, Roddy White, Julio Jones, Demarius Thomas, Eric Decker, Vincent Jackson, Randall Cobb, Jordy Nelson, etc. You're right that part of it is because the options are limited, but it's at WR and not so much QB. You'll need a pretty good argument to convince me Jenkins, Aromashadu, or Simpson is on the level of any of these guys and that we should have been passing deep to them more often than handing off to AD. Good luck with that!

Purple bruise wrote:Since you asked for a definition here it is:

"Troll (Internet)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (

Sound familiar

Look in the mirror lately? You continually take jabs at people and no one says anything to you about it. Why? Because you are on the "positive side of things"? What a joke. If we did a search of your posts, a good 70% of them would have the word "naysayer" and/or "cynic" somewhere. That is the truth. You poke poke poke--and poke some more. And, yet, you somehow fail to realize what a giant hypocrite you are. Quite frankly, you are the worst.

You, of all people, to post the definition of troll is comical!

Also, you chose to use Wiki-fricken-pedia as your source?!?! Wow. That shows your intelligence right there.

Good work.

And, yes, the "troll" word is overused...by a lot.

As far as what's next for Ponder, Super Bowl homeboy!

I can be optimistic--extremely optimistic at that.

I just hope he learns to carry the team, much like AP did last season. I know we are going to lean on AP and the defense, but if Ponder can step up and be the guy in at least a few games...I think I can be happy with that. He simply needs to show that he can be the guy to take over when other guys are struggling, elite QB style. He is the leader--and he needs to prove that.

dead_poet wrote: http://www.reactiongifs.com/

I don't know what the heck show that .gif was taken from, though. I just felt it was appropriate.

George of the Jungle.

MelanieMFunk wrote: Look in the mirror lately? You continually take jabs at people and no one says anything to you about it. Why? Because you are on the "positive side of things"? What a joke. If we did a search of your posts, a good 70% of them would have the word "naysayer" and/or "cynic" somewhere. That is the truth. You poke poke poke--and poke some more. And, yet, you somehow fail to realize what a giant hypocrite you are. Quite frankly, you are the worst.

You, of all people, to post the definition of troll is comical!

Also, you chose to use Wiki-fricken-pedia as your source?!?! Wow. That shows your intelligence right there.

Good work.

And, yes, the "troll" word is overused...by a lot.

What busy body HYPOCRITE recently posted this about Demi "Have you always had this same attitude/outlook?
If so, I find it hard to believe so many people are still griping about it. It obviously isn't helping. Kinda like your griping about the Vikings. But it all still goes on just the same.
You gripe about the Vikings, and then people gripe about you. I haven't figured out which is more annoying yet. Probably the latter; I'd rather read about Vikings (good or bad) than about you, Demi. No offense. Tired of reading about you!"
If you guessed the FUNK then you would be right
What do I have to do or say to get you off of my back. I do not ever comment on your crap so do me favor and stay out of mine (if you are capable)

Purple bruise wrote: What do I have to do or say to get you off of my back. I do not ever comment on your crap so do me favor and stay out of mine (if you are capable)

Here's an idea: Quit being totally foolish...if, ya know, you are capable.

It's so cute how you get so mad at people for doing the same thing to you, as you continually do to others. So cute! Did you bother to look up the word "hypocrite" on Wikipedia while you were at it? I think you should. Knowledge is power.

As far as the rest of your post (since you edited it and had to go find a post from days ago that must have bothered you), awww, are you stalking me again? Keeping tabs on my posts, eh? That's cute. Hey, my name is Melanie Funk. Want to go Google that again and post your findings for the rest of the message board to see, just as you did before? Good stuff right there. Do better this time and make sure it's actually me before you do so, though. You are truly something. You try so hard to embarrass others, all while just embarrassing yourself. Keep it up, pal. It's good stuff.

Hey, this thread is about your boy Ponder. Feel free to talk about him. I'll be glad to read it!

MelanieMFunk wrote: Here's an idea: Quit being totally foolish...if, ya know, you are capable.

It's so cute how you get so mad at people for doing the same thing to you, as you continually do to others. So cute! Did you bother to look up the word "hypocrite" on Wikipedia while you were at it? I think you should. Knowledge is power.

As far as the rest of your post (since you edited it and had to go find a post from days ago that must have bothered you), awww, are you stalking me again? Keeping tabs on my posts, eh? That's cute. Hey, my name is Melanie Funk. Want to go Google that again and post your findings for the rest of the message board to see, just as you did before? Good stuff right there. Do better this time and make sure it's actually me before you do so, though. You are truly something. You try so hard to embarrass others, all while just embarrassing yourself. Keep it up, pal. It's good stuff.

Hey, this thread is about your boy Ponder. Feel free to talk about him. I'll be glad to read it!

Desperate for attention huh Get it through a message board Still trying to stir up crap about the BS stalking WTF

Purple bruise wrote: Desperate for attention huh Get it through a message board Still trying to stir up crap about the BS stalking WTF

Yep. Learned from you. Thank you for the gift. Because I'm a female, right? That's why you pulled the "desperate for attention" nonsense? Please. Get a grip on yourself. I assure you, I don't want nor need attention from anyone like you, cyberstalker.

Ya know, you could be the bigger, better person that we all know that you are and just walk away, especially since you're so superior, more intelligent, more mature...and just all around better, right? #2 Vikings fan in the world, right? After Jim? WOOT WOOT!

Hey, you wanted to keep (your idol) Jim's thread peaceful and respectful. Try that.

Jim, I apologize...but dang.

Back to Ponder, unless of course Pb wants to talk about me some more? Didn't find enough about me when you Googled me? What do you want to know?

Nah, I already shared my thoughts on Ponder earlier. I just hope he learns to really lead this team.

I just hope he learns to carry the team, much like AP did last season. I know we are going to lean on AP and the defense, but if Ponder can step up and be the guy in at least a few games...I think I can be happy with that. He simply needs to show that he can be the guy to take over when other guys are struggling, elite QB style. He is the leader--and he needs to prove that.

See what I meant Jim Really odd Now playing the "female card" will it ever end