Vikings Message Board.Com

allday1991 wrote: I agree Ponder is not to blame for the lack of defense but also just wondering how many NFL teams win when there offense is turning the ball over 3 plus times a game? I imagine if there is such a stat it is quite low.

well... the Lions did it week one, the bears did it week 2 and the browns did it week 3.... and they all had 4 turnovers.

Let’s just leave the Ponder stuff aside. I agree he needs to be better, but that has been beaten to death already. So aside from that, I think the disease goes deeper.

1.) Turnovers: Our defense has really stepped up in the takeaway department, unfortunately our offense has decide to go extra sloppy at the same time
2.) Inconsistent Play on Defense: I do not understand this one, but our defense is just not as cohesive or consistent as it was last year. Sloppy plays are keeping drives alive and allowing big plays we can’t afford to give up
3.) ST: CP84 and Blair Walsh have been great. Everything else has been REALLY, REALLY bad.

What is most disheartening is that we are averaging 30 points a game. Did anyone think we’d be 0-3 averaging that much on offense? Heck, did anyone think we’d have that many points with Ponder’s current level of play? That to me says a lot about this offense and what it is capable of being with even average to above average QB play. That excites me to some extent.

The Turnovers are not that big of a mystery for the most part. Ponder’s bad picks plus some fumbl-itus by AP. Not excusable, but we know what is causing the problem. What I don’t get is how our Defense, OL, and ST have fallen so far from where they were last year. We have the same coaches, on Defense we have same everything accept Winfield. Now I get that Winfield was a big contributor, but I can’t believe he was covering up this much slop? On OL we have everything the same. Is this re-adjustment woes where other DC have figured out how to beat us? ST, I have no idea what has happened.

Not a lot in the way of answers to go along with some very sloppy football. What a shame.

Mothman wrote: Imagine how the offense must feel knowing the defense can't hold a lead at the end of a game.

The idea that Ponder is to blame for this team's defensive woes is ridiculous.

The Vikes gave up 7 points in the 2nd half.

someone should youtube that Webb play so we can argue about it all week. if the man is wide open, why can't you put it in his hands, not off his hands?

Mothman wrote: I think it's safe to say your handle does likewise.

I'm a J'Marcus fann. Love that apostrophe in the first name.

mansquatch wrote:What is most disheartening is that we are averaging 30 points a game. Did anyone think we’d be 0-3 averaging that much on offense? Heck, did anyone think we’d have that many points with Ponder’s current level of play? That to me says a lot about this offense and what it is capable of being with even average to above average QB play. That excites me to some extent.

If you back out the points scored by D/ST, super short field points (credit to the Defense) and the miraculous TD run by AD to open the season the offensive picture is not quite so exciting. More like 18 points a game. Just saying.

Webbfann wrote:I'm a J'Marcus fann. Love that apostrophe in the first name.

I'm not buying that but

TheFoxInDetox wrote: If you back out the points scored by D/ST, super short field points (credit to the Defense) and the miraculous TD run by AD to open the season the offensive picture is not quite so exciting. More like 18 points a game. Just saying.

There was nothing miraculous about that play. It was just well-executed. There's no reason to take it out. The offense scored on it, didn't they?

No matter how you slice it, the Vikes aren't averaging 30 points a game. I suspect Masquatch was just optimistically rounding up.

The Vikes are averaging 27 points per game. The offense is averaging 22.3.

AADPFan wrote: well... the Lions did it week one, the bears did it week 2 and the browns did it week 3.... and they all had 4 turnovers.

In one of there games, we did it in all three! and we blame the defence because they give it up at the end? yea I get it they aren't the best defence in the world but when they stop getting 4 plus turnovers a game like you said there wont ever be a lead for us with a minute left in the fourth for them to blow. Get what I am saying?

allday1991 wrote:In one of there games, we did it in all three! and we blame the defence because they give it up at the end?

Can we just declare, once and for all, that they haven't lost these first 3 games because of the defense, or Ponder, or the special teams, or the o-line or the coaching or any other singular reason? This constant back and forth about who is to blame or who is most to blame is ridiculous because there is no single, simple answer other than the Minnesota Vikings. That's who's to blame. These are team losses in a team game and every unit, and the coaching staff, has contributed to them.

The teams they've played had something to say about who won too but since, (as the Breeze put it yesterday) blame is what's for dinner let's just put it where it belongs: on the whole freakin' team.

Mothman wrote: Can we just declare, once and for all, that they haven't lost these first 3 games because of the defense, or Ponder, or the special teams, or the o-line or the coaching or any other singular reason? This constant back and forth about who is to blame or who is most to blame is ridiculous because there is no single, simple answer other than the Minnesota Vikings. That's who's to blame. These are team losses in a team game and every unit, and the coaching staff, has contributed to them.

The teams they've played had something to say about who won too but since, (as the Breeze put it yesterday) blame is what's for dinner let's just put it where it belongs: on the whole freakin' team.

I couldn't agree more mothman! I just seems like the last few days I have came on it was 'throw the defence under the bus week', were as you said it's a combined team effort, offence, defence and coaching staff all are equally accountable.

Yes, we can declare that. Ponder or the D did not lose any of those games on his own. But the key point here that some of us have been trying to make is NOT that its all Ponder's fault. The point is, that considering all of our personnel flaws, he is the single most important flaw that needs to be fixed. Make that one change, to an average or slightly better than average QB, and we win at least 2 and maybe 3 of those games. And that change to a competent QB will elevate everyone's play on both O and D. There is no other single fix that will have such an effect, so its the logical first one to make. That doesn't mean we don't need other things fixed, but this one change gives us the most bang for the buck.

Mothman wrote: Can we just declare, once and for all, that they haven't lost these first 3 games because of the defense, or Ponder, or the special teams, or the o-line or the coaching or any other singular reason?

Webbfann wrote:Yes, we can declare that. Ponder or the D did not lose any of those games on his own. But the key point here that some of us have been trying to make is NOT that its all Ponder's fault. The point is, that considering all of our personnel flaws, he is the single most important flaw that needs to be fixed. Make that one change, to an average or slightly better than average QB, and we win at least 2 and maybe 3 of those games. And that change to a competent QB will elevate everyone's play on both O and D. There is no other single fix that will have such an effect, so its the logical first one to make. That doesn't mean we don't need other things fixed, but this one change gives us the most bang for the buck.

Okay, what I get from all that is "start Matt Cassel" and maybe they should. If Ponder doesn't start playing better, they won't have much choice but I'm not exactly sold on the idea that a relatively immobile QB who has played 17 games the past two season and threw 16 TDs and 21 TDs over that span while completing under 60% of his passes is going to make much, if any, real difference. Maybe MBT would and that's something the Vikes should take a look at it but I have my doubts about him too.

If they could make a significant upgrade at QB I have no doubt it would make a difference but are either of the backup QBs on their roster going to provide the "bang for the buck" you're talking about?

There's nothing that says they have to make just one change anyway. They should be making several, beginning this week.

Mothman wrote: Okay, what I get from all that is "start Matt Cassel" and maybe they should. If Ponder doesn't start playing better, they won't have much choice but I'm not exactly sold on the idea that a relatively immobile QB who has played 17 games the past two season and threw 16 TDs and 21 TDs over that span while completing under 60% of his passes is going to make much, if any, real difference. Maybe MBT would and that's something the Vikes should take a look at it but I have my doubts about him too.

If they could make a significant upgrade at QB I have no doubt it would make a difference but are either of the backup QBs on their roster going to provide the "bang for the buck" you're talking about?

There's nothing that says they have to make just one change anyway. They should be making several, beginning this week.

I kind of want them to put Cassel in just so we have some peace and quiet for a week, although I doubt that would last for more than a quarter lol.

mondry wrote:I kind of want them to put Cassel in just so we have some peace and quiet for a week, although I doubt that would last for more than a quarter lol.

Maybe it would work, at least for a while but Cassel's a band-aid at best.

If they bail on Ponder, my question is: is MBT a player they think can eventually become a long term solution for them and if not, why is he even on the roster?