Jim's postgame thoughts

[jackal]

I am real disappointed in the team ...

they had two weeks to get ready for a divisional rival ..

winning this game would have put them in first place...

The Bears came out ready for the game on a short week
after getting pounded on the west coast 6 days before.

We played liked we had no days to get ready and the whole
team had just climbed out of the hospital ward

I don't mind us losing ( I don't like it either) that lack of effort
makes me question being a fan of this team at all. I don't
like whiners and people who don't try. This team didn't even
seem to show up to their biggest game of the season.

[Purple bruise]

Just for fun, let's add another player for comparison. How about Jerome Simpson. I'm sure you've heard of him. He had a rookie QB throwing to him last year - he ended up with 50 catches for 725 yards and 4 TD's. This year, he has Ponder throwing to him. In seven games, he has 12 catches for 138 yards. That projects to 27 catches and 315 yards and no TD's for the season.

And his rookie QB last year didn't have the luxury of eight-nine men in the box nearly every play.

To me, that's how bad Ponder is. He's throwing for less than 2/3 the yardage of the top QB's. With a great QB, Rudolph has 60 receptions for 600 yards and 10 TD's (and projects to ~90/900/15 for a full season). He looks like a legitimate probowl TE threat. Jenkins, with a great QB, projects to 65 receptions and 727 yards (low-mid #2 WR numbers, exceptional #3 WR numbers). He looks like a legitimate receiver now. Harvin's numbers go through the roof, because he is that dynamic of a player.

But we're all biased - looking at the world through purple glasses. How's this for a challenge: find a fan of another team (that isn't from Ponder's college or his hometown) who would say "Boy, I'd really like Ponder to be the future starter for my team".

JUST FOR FUN:
So now it is Ponder's fault for Simpson"s production Right on but you conveniently left out the part of Simpson being on suspension for the first 3 games of the this year and then being hobbled with a foot injury that is not even healed yet and add to that his dropped passes (of course those must be Ponder's fault also).
And about Ponder playing against 8 man lines, have you watched the games? Most of the time that might open up a quick pass type of offense, which the Vikes used prior to Harvin's injury (seemed Quite effective before Harvin going out with his injury. Rudolph has good hands but also has made some key drops and is slower than mud. That 8 and 9 man line that the Vikes face crushes the Vike's o-line leaving Ponder little or no time to even throw quick passes. Get real.

[Demi]

Our WRs are bad. They'd be bad with Webb or MBT or Sage or Favre or T-Jack or even Brady, Brees and Rodgers.

And yet, they're being ignored while wide open, over thrown, under thrown. There are plenty of receivers that look bad with bad quarterbacks...and look good with good quarterbacks.

[Mercy Percy]

Just for fun, let's add another player for comparison. How about Jerome Simpson. I'm sure you've heard of him. He had a rookie QB throwing to him last year - he ended up with 50 catches for 725 yards and 4 TD's. This year, he has Ponder throwing to him. In seven games, he has 12 catches for 138 yards. That projects to 27 catches and 315 yards and no TD's for the season.

And his rookie QB last year didn't have the luxury of eight-nine men in the box nearly every play.

To me, that's how bad Ponder is. He's throwing for less than 2/3 the yardage of the top QB's. With a great QB, Rudolph has 60 receptions for 600 yards and 10 TD's (and projects to ~90/900/15 for a full season). He looks like a legitimate probowl TE threat. Jenkins, with a great QB, projects to 65 receptions and 727 yards (low-mid #2 WR numbers, exceptional #3 WR numbers). He looks like a legitimate receiver now. Harvin's numbers go through the roof, because he is that dynamic of a player.

But we're all biased - looking at the world through purple glasses. How's this for a challenge: find a fan of another team (that isn't from Ponder's college or his hometown) who would say "Boy, I'd really like Ponder to be the future starter for my team".

Simpson also hasnt played 5 games 4 because of suspension and 1 because of injury which means hes played 6 games.

[Mercy Percy]

And yet, they're being ignored while wide open, over thrown, under thrown. There are plenty of receivers that look bad with bad quarterbacks...and look good with good quarterbacks.

And Dropping 6 balls last week ? How would the game of turned out if we would have sustained drives with catches? Im not drooling over Ponder, he needs to stay in the pocket longer and be accurate. Good Receivers make Good Quarterbacks and vice versa. You saw Marshall pulling in crazy balls from Cutler now you tell me who on our team could do that besides maybe Harvin.

[Demi]

And Dropping 6 balls last week ? How would the game of turned out if we would have sustained drives with catches? Im not drooling over Ponder, he needs to stay in the pocket longer and be accurate. Good Receivers make Good Quarterbacks and vice versa. You saw Marshall pulling in crazy balls from Cutler now you tell me who on our team could do that besides maybe Harvin.

It wouldn't matter because Ponder couldn't make those throws...

[Eli]

You saw Marshall pulling in crazy balls from Cutler now you tell me who on our team could do that besides maybe Harvin.

Certainly not Harvin. Harvin has skills, but they're not in making great catches. He doesn't drop many balls, can do amazing things when given a little space, and he's tough as nails. But he's not a prototypical "hands" receiver like Rudolph or Marshall.

[mansquatch]

It wouldn't matter because Ponder couldn't make those throws...

Ponder made those throws on Sunday. The difference is his WR dropped them. They couldn't drop the ball if it wasn't there in the first place...

[mansquatch]

I highly reccomend you go look at Drew Brees' stats for his 2 first full seasons before you laugh so hard at that.

Very good comparison actually. This is why I asked my questions in the CDC thread. If you are done with Ponder, I ask why you think he's reached the pinnacle of his ability? What basis do you have for that conclusion after 22 games? Brees' history is a great example that flys in the face of this thinking. Heck, San Diego dropped him in favor of Philip Rivers due to this kind of thinking. You guys might be right about Ponder, all I and others are saying is that conclusion is still as likely to be premature as it is to be right. Patience Grasshopper...

[HardcoreVikesFan]

If I may reiterate my stance (even though I don't think anyone really cares), I still think ultimate judgement on Ponder cannot come until the last game of this season. I think by then we will have a better understanding of who he is as a QB. Yes, I am leaning in the direction that Ponder does not have 'it.' However, it really doesn't matter what I think because as I stated earlier as well, it will take something drastic for us to pursue a QB change.

[mondry]

If I may reiterate my stance (even though I don't think anyone really cares), I still think ultimate judgement on Ponder cannot come until the last game of this season. I think by then we will have a better understanding of who he is as a QB. Yes, I am leaning in the direction that Ponder does not have 'it.' However, it really doesn't matter what I think because as I stated earlier as well, it will take something drastic for us to pursue a QB change.

Yeah, the big thing is there isn't really anyone to get. RGIII or LUCK was really it, we won't be picking in the top 3 as far as I can see so reality is that we're pretty much stuck with Ponder, for better or for worse.

[losperros]

Yeah, the big thing is there isn't really anyone to get. RGIII or LUCK was really it, we won't be picking in the top 3 as far as I can see so reality is that we're pretty much stuck with Ponder, for better or for worse.

I have to agree with both of you. The Vikings are going to make sure that their R1 draft pick can or cannot cut it as the franchise QB. The decision won't be made until the season is over and maybe not even then.

That said, if Ponder starts next season and falls flat on his face, then I think that's when we'll see the Vikings give Joe Webb a shot. Unless the Vikings sign a decent free agent QB, I'm not sure the QB depth chart will look any different next year.

[mansquatch]

It is an interesting situation in the NFL right now. They have made the passing game so much the "it" thing in the league that you pretty have to have a gamer at the position to win. Even the vaunted Steelers with Dick Labeau are garbage without Big Ben.

This creates an interesting issue. How do you get one?
1.) Get Lucky if one hits Free Agency through some sort of strange circumstance.
Examples: Cutler, Brees, Kurt Warner a few years back, Peyton Manning last year

2.) Draft

In the absence of the above you basically have a band-aid at the position and never really see the full potential of your squad. Then compound this with the fact that thest candidates are typically taken in the top 10 picks of the draft and even then you do not know if that player will be a boom or a bust.

So what do you do? If you draft to rebuild a team and fail on the QB you end up being stuck in the middle, winnign 8-10 games, enough to be relevant, but never going over the top to make a deep run in the playoffs. As a result you are always drafting below the top 10 and thus never have a shot at the blue chip QB prospect, that is unless you trade away picks and compromise your roster for a chance at the QB.

IMO, this is a broken system. I thnk we will see in the next 5 year an organization that recognizes there is a blue chip, can't miss QB at the top of the draft. They will then tell their starters to take the season off and tank it in order to have a shot at glory 2-3 years donw the road. One could argue that Indianapolis did just this last year to get Luck, although they canned their GM so maybe not. Regardless, as the game becomes more and more focused on passing, the need for a game changing QB is going to reach a tipping point.

The alternative is take a player at a different position who is truly great, and break the mold. I wonder if AP is that player, but such an approach would be a true change and require a strong pass defense to work. Also an OC with the balls to try and run that system. Not saying the Vikings will or even should do this, but in the absence of a QB, we will end up being "stuck in the middle again", maybe worse given the other 3 teams in our division have an "it" guy at QB.

[mondry]

It is an interesting situation in the NFL right now. They have made the passing game so much the "it" thing in the league that you pretty have to have a gamer at the position to win. Even the vaunted Steelers with Dick Labeau are garbage without Big Ben.

This creates an interesting issue. How do you get one?
1.) Get Lucky if one hits Free Agency through some sort of strange circumstance.
Examples: Cutler, Brees, Kurt Warner a few years back, Peyton Manning last year

2.) Draft

In the absence of the above you basically have a band-aid at the position and never really see the full potential of your squad. Then compound this with the fact that thest candidates are typically taken in the top 10 picks of the draft and even then you do not know if that player will be a boom or a bust.

So what do you do? If you draft to rebuild a team and fail on the QB you end up being stuck in the middle, winnign 8-10 games, enough to be relevant, but never going over the top to make a deep run in the playoffs. As a result you are always drafting below the top 10 and thus never have a shot at the blue chip QB prospect, that is unless you trade away picks and compromise your roster for a chance at the QB.

IMO, this is a broken system. I thnk we will see in the next 5 year an organization that recognizes there is a blue chip, can't miss QB at the top of the draft. They will then tell their starters to take the season off and tank it in order to have a shot at glory 2-3 years donw the road. One could argue that Indianapolis did just this last year to get Luck, although they canned their GM so maybe not. Regardless, as the game becomes more and more focused on passing, the need for a game changing QB is going to reach a tipping point.

The alternative is take a player at a different position who is truly great, and break the mold. I wonder if AP is that player, but such an approach would be a true change and require a strong pass defense to work. Also an OC with the balls to try and run that system. Not saying the Vikings will or even should do this, but in the absence of a QB, we will end up being "stuck in the middle again", maybe worse given the other 3 teams in our division have an "it" guy at QB.

It's still way too early to tell but the Redskins trade for RGIII could pay off. I think more and more often for these top prospects you'll see trades like this where a team essentially trades 2 years worth of picks for a guy. That's because it's exactly like you said, if you can't get that guy, it really doesn't even matter, your squad is destined for 10-6 at best.

I actually feel like our current offense could be that "different" idea of running the football / short passing game and amazing defense. Of course we don't have any where near the talent on defense to pull off such a tactic and musgrave has no idea what ball control means but I could "see" it working with the 2000 ravens defense and a guy like AD. The problem is it's harder to build an elite defense that would be needed to shut offenses down then to just build your own decent offense.

I do wonder how the JETS teams with revis and what not a couple years ago with AD would have done. They would have likely still needed better QB play but something to think about.

[Mothman]

It is an interesting situation in the NFL right now. They have made the passing game so much the "it" thing in the league that you pretty have to have a gamer at the position to win. Even the vaunted Steelers with Dick Labeau are garbage without Big Ben.

This creates an interesting issue. How do you get one?
1.) Get Lucky if one hits Free Agency through some sort of strange circumstance.
Examples: Cutler, Brees, Kurt Warner a few years back, Peyton Manning last year

2.) Draft

In the absence of the above you basically have a band-aid at the position and never really see the full potential of your squad. Then compound this with the fact that thest candidates are typically taken in the top 10 picks of the draft and even then you do not know if that player will be a boom or a bust.

So what do you do? If you draft to rebuild a team and fail on the QB you end up being stuck in the middle, winnign 8-10 games, enough to be relevant, but never going over the top to make a deep run in the playoffs. As a result you are always drafting below the top 10 and thus never have a shot at the blue chip QB prospect, that is unless you trade away picks and compromise your roster for a chance at the QB.

IMO, this is a broken system. I thnk we will see in the next 5 year an organization that recognizes there is a blue chip, can't miss QB at the top of the draft. They will then tell their starters to take the season off and tank it in order to have a shot at glory 2-3 years donw the road. One could argue that Indianapolis did just this last year to get Luck, although they canned their GM so maybe not. Regardless, as the game becomes more and more focused on passing, the need for a game changing QB is going to reach a tipping point.

The alternative is take a player at a different position who is truly great, and break the mold. I wonder if AP is that player, but such an approach would be a true change and require a strong pass defense to work. Also an OC with the balls to try and run that system. Not saying the Vikings will or even should do this, but in the absence of a QB, we will end up being "stuck in the middle again", maybe worse given the other 3 teams in our division have an "it" guy at QB.

The Bears traded to acquire Cutler. He wasn't a free agent. Nevertheless, I see your point.

Interesting post... I definitely think they've pushed the rules too far in favor of the passing game but I think we're going to start seeing teams without elite QBs and 5000 yard passing games win more Super Bowls over the next decade.

With rare exceptions, Super Bowl winners have always had good QBs. There's more of an imbalance lately but maybe that's a consequence of several factors coming together for those teams rather than an indication that a team needs a top 5 quarterback to win it all. Looking back over the last decade or so, I see several teams that won the Super Bowl without elite QBs or with QBs who would eventually become elite but hadn't reached that level yet when they won their first Super Bowl. Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer are often cited as examples of non-elite QBs who won it all in this century but it would be a real stretch to say Tom Brady or Ben Roethlisberger were elite QBs when they won their first Super Bowls. The Steelers and Pats didn't exactly ride the arms of their QBs to Super Bowl victories in 2001 and 2005. It's been a little different lately but I see no reason why it can't swing back around. An NFL team almost always needs a playmaker at QB to win a championship. It's nearly impossible to reach and win a Super Bowl despite the performance of the QB but I think a well-balanced team with a good (not great) QB can still win it all.

If a team ever actually tanks a season to acquire a blue chip QB I hope that choice blows up in their face!