Vikings Message Board.Com

I don't understand Ponder apologists. All of his turnovers have royally screwed us. He held on to the ball too long before the half and got strip sacked vs CLE. Easy chip shot range for Walsh.

Bears game: Pick 6

Lions game: Won't win any game with 4 turnovers.

He hangs onto the ball too long, stares his WRs down, cannot pass with zip. He is done

mondry wrote:The opposing defense doesn't really matter that much when it comes to Ponder.

I wasn't talking about Ponder and I think the quality of the opposing defense always matters, particularly when it comes to turnovers. Some teams are much better at forcing them than others. For example, it's fair to say that playing the Bears (who have forced 14 turnovers in 4 games and have excelled in that department for years) is different than playing the 2013 Steelers, who have yet to come up with a turnover this season.

Ponder sucks because he's just that bad and does a lot of it to himself. This is coming from someone who defended him heavily in the off season thinking his 3rd year with better weapons might actually make a difference. So yeah, I think it's very possible we're 0-4 right now with him. We've lost games with Ponder where the defense and special teams scored 14 points! But yeah he was going to blow up the steelers like Cassel did...

I hardly think Cassel "blew up" the Steelers. Greg Jennings did 99% of the work on his long TD and that was almost 1/3 of Cassel's total yardage for the day. Cassel had a good day, avoided turning the ball over, made some nice throws and helped the Vikes to a victory. As I said, he's earned the chance to start against the Panthers.

Regarding what the team's record would be if Ponder had started yesterday or if Cassel had started the previous 3 games: I'm really not interested in speculating about it because there's absolutely no way to know if changing QBs in any of the 4 games would have changed the final outcome. That sort of guessing game just becomes about what people want to believe.

808vikingsfan wrote: It was a combination. If Cassel is half a second late on that throw, Greg gets tackled as soon as his feet hit the ground.

Okay, so Jennings did 98% of the work.

808vikingsfan wrote: It was a combination. If Cassel is half a second late on that throw, Greg gets tackled as soon as his feet hit the ground.

lol yeah... funny how it's all Jennings yet he can't do it with Ponder at QB.. hmmm.....

Sigh... I'm really beginning to wonder if it's worth posting at all anymore.

Mothman wrote:Sigh... I'm really beginning to wonder if it's worth posting at all anymore.

Ignorance is strength, comrade~

GBFavreFan wrote:I don't want to assume anyone else's interpretation of the QBs' performance this season.

Please don't take this as an endorsement of Matt Cassell. But I would start him in a heartbeat over Ponder.

My suggestion is to trade Ponder. Surely, we could get a lot for him if we put him on the market.

DanAS wrote: Please don't take this as an endorsement of Matt Cassell. But I would start him in a heartbeat over Ponder.

My suggestion is to trade Ponder. Surely, we could get a lot for him if we put him on the market.

Two Snickers and a coupon for Taco Bell. That's abot it.

DanAS wrote: Please don't take this as an endorsement of Matt Cassell. But I would start him in a heartbeat over Ponder.

My suggestion is to trade Ponder. Surely, we could get a lot for him if we put him on the market.

Maybe we can give the Texans or Bucs a 6th or 7th to take him?

Mothman wrote: Okay, so Jennings did 98% of the work.

Moth, you're viewing that play as an easy one for the quarterback, which it is.

The point we're making is that we have enough history on Ponder to know that be tends to be late and often inaccurate on that throw. Either of those two things, and Greg Jennings can't do the thing he was brought here to do, which is rack up YAC.

That's not saying Matt Cassel did anything spectacular. It's saying he did what an NFL quarterback should have done on that play. Unfortunately, we Vikings fans aren't used to that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

J. Kapp 11 wrote:Moth, you're viewing that play as an easy one for the quarterback, which it is.

The point we're making is that we have enough history on Ponder to know that be tends to be late and often inaccurate on that throw. Either of those two things, and Greg Jennings can't do the thing he was brought here to do, which is rack up YAC.

That's not saying Matt Cassel did anything spectacular. It's saying he did what an NFL quarterback should have done on that play. Unfortunately, we Vikings fans aren't used to that.

None of that is lost on me but my point had nothing to do with Ponder. Unfortunately, it's become all-but-impossible to make a point around here without his name coming up. As you said, I'm viewing that play as an easy one for the QB. That easy play was almost 1/3 of Cassel's production in a game where he supposedly "blew up" the Steelers. I suppose what constitutes "blowing up" a defense is subjective but Cassel's performance certainly didn't strike me as exceptional.

Mothman wrote: None of that is lost on me but my point had nothing to do with Ponder. Unfortunately, it's become all-but-impossible to make a point around here without his name coming up. As you said, I'm viewing that play as an easy one for the QB. That easy play was almost 1/3 of Cassel's production in a game where he supposedly "blew up" the Steelers. I suppose what constitutes "blowing up" a defense is subjective but Cassel's performance certainly didn't strike me as exceptional.

First and foremost I am a true Viking fan and was very happy that they won. I have said this before and will say it again, if Cassel, or anyone else can start at quarterback and win games then great. I feel like there has been quite a bit of over reaction about how much better Cassel played than has Ponder. Cassel made an average pass to Jennings, who made a spectacular run after the catch. He also threw a certain interception into a very tightly covered Patterson, who ultimately saved an interception by swatting the ball out of the defender's hands. He got blind sided and fumbled the ball, just like the week before, when Ponder got blind sided and lost the ball. It was very fortunate for Cassel that Simpson recovered his fumble and very unfortunate for Ponder that the defense recovered his. The offense welcomed back Felton who did an excellent job as a run blocker and pass protector. The o-line stepped up and actually gave the QB more than 2 seconds to throw the ball.
All that being said, Cassel played quite well and regardless if Ponder is healthy or not I think that Cassel should start and play against the Panthers. Credit could be given to Cassel for winning the game but with the return of Felton, better o-line play and the running of AD I would say that it was a team win. Fans would and do blame the two losses on Ponder but to me it was a team loss and I put more blame on the defense for losing those games at the end. That's just me apparently and I could not care less what anyone else says or feels about the matter.
Most importantly the Vikes won and if they can keep on winning with Cassel then leave him in there.

I definitely think Cassel has earned a second start, but I'm keeping in mind that he's also completely capable, if you saw any Chiefs games last year, of turning in a real stinker of a game. Or, at least, a jaw-dropping God-awful stretch within a game. He's not the messiah, he's just a better alternative to Ponder.

DanAS wrote: Please don't take this as an endorsement of Matt Cassell. But I would start him in a heartbeat over Ponder.

My suggestion is to trade Ponder. Surely, we could get a lot for him if we put him on the market.

I wouldn't even trade a piece of bubble gum for Ponder.

Mothman wrote: None of that is lost on me but my point had nothing to do with Ponder. Unfortunately, it's become all-but-impossible to make a point around here without his name coming up. As you said, I'm viewing that play as an easy one for the QB. That easy play was almost 1/3 of Cassel's production in a game where he supposedly "blew up" the Steelers. I suppose what constitutes "blowing up" a defense is subjective but Cassel's performance certainly didn't strike me as exceptional.

Well, blowing up wasn't my term. But I thought he played very well, and he played exceptionally well in the second half.

I'm really surprised that comparisons to Ponder bother you so much, especially given the thread's title and intent. This thread is MEANT to talk about the various differences between Ponder and Cassel.

A lot of attention is being given to a pass that could have been picked, a fumble that could have been lost, and easy throws that any quarterback should be able to make. I find it unfortunate that little attention is being given to the excellent plays that Cassel DID make, such as the big gainer to Simpson or the second touchdown to Jennings, or the fact that he connected on his last 11 throws. If we're going to compare quarterbacks, it's only fair to mention the good things Cassel did. And while much attention has been given to the O-line's improved play, I would submit (as have others) that having a quarterback who actually stays in the pocket makes it much easier for the O-line to play well.

Mostly it's the eye test (sorry to sound like a broken record). Christian Ponder looks like a defeated man half the time. The difference in leadership is palpable, at least to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free