Vikings Message Board.Com

Posted: **Mon Feb 10, 2014 8:10 am**

losperros wrote:
I agree with all the above. While Ponder is not a "franchise" QB yet (and maybe never will be), that doesn't mean he can't be a solid backup. I'm convinced that Ponder getting a fresh start elsewhere would be good for him and just maybe for the team that trades for him.

Regarding the 2012 season, AD carried the team on his back. But even so, Ponder certainly had his good moments. This was especially true during the month of December, in my view. Ponder made wise decisions, threw with accuracy, and for one month suddenly looked as if he could still be the guy. Then he comes out and plays poorly to begin the 2013 season. Go figure. It's that inconsistency that drives me crazy.

While I have never denied that Ponder has "solid backup" potential, even that isn't a sure thing, and I'm not sure that you can get draft picks by offering to trade those kind of players. I'd be surprised if the Vikes got anything for Ponder, and quite surprised if we got more than a 6th or 7th rounder.

Posted: **Mon Feb 10, 2014 11:02 am**

DanAS wrote: While I have never denied that Ponder has "solid backup" potential, even that isn't a sure thing, and I'm not sure that you can get draft picks by offering to trade those kind of players. I'd be surprised if the Vikes got anything for Ponder, and quite surprised if we got more than a 6th or 7th rounder.

You could be right, Dan. Quite honestly, I have no idea what Ponder's or anyone's worth in a trade would be. I guess it depends on each team and their needs.

Posted: **Mon Feb 10, 2014 11:26 am**

losperros wrote:You could be right, Dan. Quite honestly, I have no idea what Ponder's or anyone's worth in a trade would be. I guess it depends on each team and their needs.

Exactly. It also depends on the value they put on a player, how they feel he'd fit with their team and whether they believe they can help that player reduce or eliminate problems in his game.

Posted: **Mon Feb 10, 2014 11:45 am**

majorm wrote:Ugghhh. I'm done talking about Ponder. Unless he's still on the team to start the season I've nothing more to say about him.

Promise

Posted: **Mon Feb 10, 2014 1:21 pm**

I'd keep Ponder around. CLEARLY not to be the starter whatsoever but he'd be a decent back up QB. When he's healthy and can run the ball he's effective and we've seen him do better out of the shotgun with a game plan that puts a bit of emphasis on getting the passing game going. As a starter he's never going to last 16 games playing that way but as the back up when you need to come in and get a win it's fine.

I don't think Norv would put him under center so much, nor in 1-2 WR set's as often either and I think he could come up with a system that makes Ponder better. How much better would remain to be seen but clearly change can be a catalyst for the better and his stock is already low so not much downside. I don't think you dump Ponder just for the sake of dumping him in this situation, we don't really gain much from it and the 2nd and 3rd string QB slots are wide open positions on this team.

Posted: **Mon Feb 10, 2014 1:33 pm**

mondry wrote:I'd keep Ponder around. CLEARLY not to be the starter whatsoever but he'd be a decent back up QB. When he's healthy and can run the ball he's effective and we've seen him do better out of the shotgun with a game plan that puts a bit of emphasis on getting the passing game going. As a starter he's never going to last 16 games playing that way but as the back up when you need to come in and get a win it's fine.

I don't think Norv would put him under center so much, nor in 1-2 WR set's as often either and I think he could come up with a system that makes Ponder better. How much better would remain to be seen but clearly change can be a catalyst for the better and his stock is already low so not much downside. I don't think you dump Ponder just for the sake of dumping him in this situation, we don't really gain much from it and the 2nd and 3rd string QB slots are wide open positions on this team.

I think that's a key point. If they get rid of him, they're essentially putting themselves in a position where they'll need to add 3 QBs this offseason instead of two. They might be fine with that but it's a consideration.

Posted: **Mon Feb 10, 2014 1:34 pm**

I honestly don't know where this "Ponder could be a fine backup" thinking come from. We pretty much all agree he's a bad starter. But he's not a borderline bad starter, he's pretty freaking awful. Does that mean you just downgrade him a notch and now he's a fine backup?

I don't understand that thinking. At all.

Imagine a starter going down late in a game and Ponder coming in and having to protect a small lead. But he's unable to even keep his team on the field.

Or Ponder coming in and having to stage some kind of come back from behind. You can count that game as lost, turn it off and go wash the car.

Worst of all, imagine Ponder having to start for several weeks in place of an injured starter. Now we're right back where we started.

Is it OK for a guy to lose games if he only has to do it a few times each season? Again ... I don't get it.

Posted: **Mon Feb 10, 2014 1:41 pm**

Eli wrote:I honestly don't know where this "Ponder could be a fine backup" thinking come from. We pretty much all agree he's a bad starter. But he's not a borderline bad starter, he's pretty freaking awful. Does that mean you just downgrade him a notch and now he's a fine backup?

I don't understand that thinking. At all.

Imagine a starter going down late in a game and Ponder coming in and having to protect a small lead. But he's unable to even keep his team on the field.

Or Ponder coming in and having to stage some kind of come back from behind. You can count that game as lost, turn it off and go wash the car.

Worst of all, imagine Ponder having to start for several weeks in place of an injured starter. Now we're right back where we started.

Is it OK for a guy to lose games if he only has to do it a few times each season? Again ... I don't get it.

Well ... the team went 10-6 with him as the starter in 2012 so I'm not sure him having to come in means the team definitely will lose.

I think that season and his age are also reasons why people think he can be a solid backup ... maybe even if you don't consider him one right now. As young as he is he could still improve.

Plus, the team will probably carry 3 QBs ... so he wouldn't even have to be the #2 guy.

Posted: **Mon Feb 10, 2014 1:44 pm**

Ponder is a lost cause and a liability. He has gotten worse rather then learn and improve. He is a bad investment that only a fool would pour more money into.

Posted: **Mon Feb 10, 2014 1:46 pm**

Cliff wrote: Well ... the team went 10-6 with him as the starter in 2012 so I'm not sure him having to come in means the team definitely will lose.

I think that season and his age are also reasons why people think he can be a solid backup ... maybe even if you don't consider him one right now. As young as he is he could still improve.

Plus, the team will probably carry 3 QBs ... so he wouldn't even have to be the #2 guy.

Great points and I would be anxious to see what another year of experience, being healthy, with a better o-line, better coaching and a chance to have a competitive training camp would produce. Make no mistake about it there will be fans rooting against him (as most do) and will be highly disappointed if and when he succeeds.

Posted: **Mon Feb 10, 2014 1:47 pm**

Eli wrote:I honestly don't know where this "Ponder could be a fine backup" thinking come from. We pretty much all agree he's a bad starter. But he's not a borderline bad starter, he's pretty freaking awful. Does that mean you just downgrade him a notch and now he's a fine backup?

I don't understand that thinking. At all.

Imagine a starter going down late in a game and Ponder coming in and having to protect a small lead. But he's unable to even keep his team on the field.

Or Ponder coming in and having to stage some kind of come back from behind. You can count that game as lost, turn it off and go wash the car.

Worst of all, imagine Ponder having to start for several weeks in place of an injured starter. Now we're right back where we started.

Is it OK for a guy to lose games if he only has to do it a few times each season? Again ... I don't get it.

Here's a list of the 2013 back QBs (published July 10, 2013)

1. Kirk Cousins, Washington Redskins
2. Kyle Orton, Dallas Cowboys
3. Chad Henne, Jacksonville Jaguars
4. Chase Daniel, Kansas City Chiefs
5. Kevin Kolb, Buffalo Bills
6. Nick Foles, Philadelphia Eagles
7. Matt Moore, Miami Dolphins
8. Matt Hasselbeck, Indianapolis Colts
9. Matt Cassel, Minnesota Vikings
10. Ryan Fitzpatrick, Tennessee Titans
11. Ryan Mallett, New England Patriots
12. Shaun Hill, Detroit Lions
13. Colt McCoy, San Francisco 49ers
14. T.J. Yates, Houston Texans
15. Jason Campbell, Cleveland Browns
16. Tyrod Taylor, Baltimore Ravens
18. Drew Stanton, Arizona Cardinals
19. Brady Quinn, Seattle Seahawks
20. Bruce Gradkowski, Pittsburgh Steelers
21. David Carr, New York Giants
22. Dominique Davis, Atlanta Falcons
23. Austin Davis, St. Louis Rams
24. Brock Osweiler, Denver Broncos
25. Terrelle Pryor, Oakland Raiders
26. Josh Johnson, Cincinnati Bengals
27. Josh McCown, Chicago Bears
28. Luke McCown, New Orleans Saints
29. Derek Anderson, Carolina Panthers
30. Charlie Whitehurst, San Diego Chargers
31. Graham Harrell, Green Bay Packers
32. Geno Smith, New York Jets
33. Mike Glennon, Tampa Bay Buccaneers
34. Tyler Wilson, Oakland Raiders
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100000 ... arterbacks

Backups are backups. They aren't starters. Only a few teams in the league could possibly absorb a backup starting for any length of time. Are you saying Ponder isn't better guys like Brady Quinn, Colt McCoy, Charlie Whithurst, or David Carr? Of course, you'll probably say no, but it's all a matter of perspective. I'm sure if you asked fans of other teams if they'd rather have the guys I listed above or Ponder as their backup, they'd probably take Ponder. He's proven he's not a great starter. What makes you think he can't be a decent backup?

Ponder has protected leads. Ponder has come back from behind to win. He has that capability and already demonstrated it. He just hasn't demonstrated he can do it consistently, which is what you want from your starter. He can do it in spurts, which is what you want out of your backup. It's not like he's incapable of winning.

Posted: **Mon Feb 10, 2014 1:55 pm**

Eli wrote:I honestly don't know where this "Ponder could be a fine backup" thinking come from. We pretty much all agree he's a bad starter. But he's not a borderline bad starter, he's pretty freaking awful. Does that mean you just downgrade him a notch and now he's a fine backup?

I don't understand that thinking. At all.

It stems from the fact that not everyone sees him as "freaking awful". I don't think the Vikings could have won 10 games in 2012 if that assessment of Ponder was true and I don't think they would have had so many closes losses with Ponder at QB last year if it were true either. I think he could become a good backup because a.) they've been pretty competitive with him as a starter and b.) I doubt he's done maturing as a QB.

Or Ponder coming in and having to stage some kind of come back from behind. You can count that game as lost, turn it off and go wash the car.

LOL! He led them back from a 10 point halftime deficit against Washington just last season.

Is it OK for a guy to lose games if he only has to do it a few times each season? Again ... I don't get it.

If you choose to ignore the positive things he's accomplished, you won't ever get it. For example, you imply above that a Ponder start automatically equals a loss even though there is ample evidence to the contrary. You imply that he's incapable of leading the team back from a deficit even though there's evidence to the contrary. Why ignore the evidence? See him for what he is... good and bad.

Posted: **Mon Feb 10, 2014 1:59 pm**

I think it is time for Ponder to go to a new team and start again. I think he can be a serviceable backup in this league. Ponder is a nice person and has many advantages in life, but the guy simply isn't a good quarterback. I personally don't want him a part of this team any longer, even if that means we don't have an active QB on the roster heading into the offseason.

Posted: **Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:01 pm**

If you want to say "Ponder is useless as anything other than a backup" I'd be in complete agreement. Saying that he'd make a fine backup is absurd.

Right now the Vikings have no choice but to keep him under contract for another year. Bring him into camp and if he's no worse than three other QBs on the roster, he makes the team and becomes a backup next year.

Posted: **Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:06 pm**

The title to this topic makes me laugh, simply because I can only imagine who might want to trade anything for Ponder. As far as the forum battles regarding Ponder as a backup, a "solid" backup, what can he do differently as a backup that he couldn't do as a starter. He doesn't drive the offense!

Addendum: Yes, I know he is currently the only choice, but times will change. I am simply opining as to any attempt to keep him in a Vikes uniform and getting on the field. I once showed support, but "he" changed my mind.

...wisdom

Vikings Message Board.Com

Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.

Re: Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.

Re: Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.

Re: Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.

Re: Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.

Re: Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.

Re: Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.

Re: Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.

Re: Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.

Re: Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.

Re: Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.

Re: Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.

Re: Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.

Re: Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.

Re: Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.

Re: Vikings will seek trade for Ponder.