What if this had happened? Would you stiil want Ponder out?

[majorm]

It's so much fun to play the hypothetical game.

Paul Charchian - filling in for PA - brought up an interesting point on KFAN this morning. Actually it may have been Joe Nelson, The Master Mixer of the Morning Montage that said it.

He said what if the defense would have coughed up the lead in the last minute AGAIN like they did against the Bears and Browns the previousl two weeks? Then the Vikings lose the game in OT. Would the glow around Matt Cassell be as bright had they lost?

My thought was to turn that question on its head..

What if the D comes up with key stops against Bears and Browns and Vikes WIN those games. With Ponder playing exactly the same, they would have been 2-1. Would you be as anxious to send him to the bench??

I mean even though by nearly all accounts Cassell played considerably better than Ponder, the Steelers game basically came down to the same thing the previous two games came down to. The defense making a key stop to preserve a lead in the last seconds of the game. Yesterday, they did it. The last two times, they did not.

I guess there was one major difference. The Steelers had to fight back from 17 points down and may have run out of gas a bit.

[PurpleMustReign]

Well considering everyone I knew was saying how much they liked Cassel while the game was still in the third quarter, I think even if they lost they would still want Ponder gone.
Me, if they had lost, Id be calling for MBT.

[The Breeze]

It's so much fun to play the hypothetical game.

Paul Charchian - filling in for PA - brought up an interesting point on KFAN this morning. Actually it may have been Joe Nelson, The Master Mixer of the Morning Montage that said it.

He said what if the defense would have coughed up the lead in the last minute AGAIN like they did against the Bears and Browns the previousl two weeks? Then the Vikings lose the game in OT. Would the glow around Matt Cassell be as bright had they lost?

My thought was to turn that question on its head..

What if the D comes up with key stops against Bears and Browns and Vikes WIN those games. With Ponder playing exactly the same, they would have been 2-1. Would you be as anxious to send him to the bench??

I mean even though by nearly all accounts Cassell played considerably better than Ponder, the Steelers game basically came down to the same thing the previous two games came down to. The defense making a key stop to preserve a lead in the last second of the game. Yesterday, they did it. The last two times, they did not.

I guess there was one major difference. The Steelers had to fight back from 17 points down and may have run

That's a POV I've been stating. Not to build a case for or against either one of our QBs....just to show how little these games have hinged on.

One could look to no turnovers as being a primary reason we got a big lead also.

not much to do til sunday....and the games a far more interesting to watch than pick apart during the week

[majorm]

Well considering everyone I knew was saying how much they liked Cassel while the game was still in the third quarter, I think even if they lost they would still want Ponder gone.
Me, if they had lost, Id be calling for MBT.

Gotcha. I live in KC area and didn't get to watch the game. But I know I've wanted Cassell in there since the Detroit game so it certainly wouldn't change my mind.

It is kind of weird to think how close the Vikings are to being 3-1 in spite of Ponder's deficiencies. Two leads given up in the last minute. Of course they could have done it again yesterday and be 0-4 too.

[Webbfann]

Would the glow around Matt Cassell be as bright had they lost?

It would for me. He clearly was better in all aspects of the game. I don't think he is glowing though, it was just one game and he clearly deserves to start again.

My thought was to turn that question on its head..

What if the D comes up with key stops against Bears and Browns and Vikes WIN those games. With Ponder playing exactly the same, they would have been 2-1. Would you be as anxious to send him to the bench

Yes, because Ponder is painfully sub-average in all aspects of the game except running. This has been obvious to me for at least a year. When we win with him, we win despite him not because of him. I was not fooled by his quick start last year, nor his good finish. The true Ponder is the 2-5 Ponder in the middle of last year, bore out by the 0-3 Ponder this year.

[S197]

Yes, Cassel should still start even if the Steelers came back. The turnovers have been mentioned, which is rather big but there were other factors as well. Mainly, he elevated the play of everyone around him. The offensive line looked better because he stepped up into the pocket rather than running out and he also made very quick reads. He hit his receivers in stride and with good timing, resulting in more completions and YAC. The actual threat of a passing game also opened up gaping holes for Peterson.

If we look back to the Browns game, Ponder missed a rather easy third down out route, which probably seals the game. Cassel audibles out of a run on second down and throws a perfectly placed slant to Simpson for 9 yards. It's just two plays but I think it summarizes the difference between the two. We also have to remember that Cassel put this performance together knowing he was the starter only days before the game.

To be quite honest, I think Cassel overachieved on this game and the results are probably not going to be this good going forward. He had some lucky breaks with Patterson and Simpson bailing him out on potential turnovers. However, he did more than enough to warrant another start.

[mondry]

I really don't get this line of thinking. Basically it's like "if we have 3 problems, and we can improve on one of them, is that a good idea?" DUH!!!!!! I guess I just don't buy into the lose on purpose for improved draft picks.

[PurpleKoolaid]

Too many what if's. Ponder proved to me long ago he wasn't NFL starting QB material. Despite having spurts of being ok. Cassel is the better QB. No doubt about that. Time will tell if last week was a fluke though. But our D better get its act together if we want to go anywhere.

[Demi]

To be quite honest, I think Cassel overachieved on this game and the results are probably not going to be this good going forward. He had some lucky breaks with Patterson and Simpson bailing him out on potential turnovers. However, he did more than enough to warrant another start.

Also played a pretty bad team on the other side of the planet.

Ponder should have been benched in some of his performances earlier in the year. If we lose that last game it wasn't because of Cassel. But you can point to a number of plays by Ponder that went just as far, if not further, in costing us those previous games.

[soflavike]

If by some miracle we were 4-0 right now and Ponder had been the QB for 3 wins, I would still want him benched. He is an inferior quarterback, with a weak, inaccurate arm and terrible vision. Cassel gives us a better chance to win.

[mosscarter]

i thought the difference was night and day. we actually had some big passing plays but also took numerous shots down the field too. i honestly think its been 2 years when we last had a 70 pass. do you realize how pathetic that is. cassell isn't the next montana, but i didn't see anything to warrant ponder getting his job back.

[TheFoxInDetox]

Here's the thing. Regardless of wins or losses, turnovers, QB statistics, defensive ineptitude...The bottom line is, Cassel passed the eye test, Ponder failed it every time he took the field. Ponder looks uncomfortable, confused, indecisive and just plain inept. Cassel looked, for all intents and purposes, like an NFL QB. He was better in all immeasurable areas of the game.

So, to answer your question. If Ponder had played exactly the same as he did the first 3 games and we were 2-1 and Cassel played exactly the way he did in London but we lost, I'd still say with 100% certainty that Cassel gives the Vikings the best chance to win the next game.

[Laserman]

Ponder is not an NFL level QB. We have all known that for some time. He has not progressed in the things he needs to since he was a rookie. He is right up there with the worst QBs in the NFL. Cassel was doing things out there Ponder will NEVER be able to do and anybody who has a basic understanding about football knows that. If Frasier and Co. stick with Ponder they are proving that they are not NFL caliber coaches either. if they go back to Ponder they will piss off the fans and Lose the Lockeroom as well.

[Webbfann]

That writing has been on the wall for a year. Now it's bold, with exclamation points. I don't know that he'll see it.

If Cassell does start our next game, it will be with weasel words about Plunders rib owwie. Frazier will never come out and say "Cassell gives us the best chance to win", and will leave us to wonder if he sees anything at all.

If Frasier and Co. stick with Ponder they are proving that they are not NFL caliber coaches either.

[Reignman]

It is kind of weird to think how close the Vikings are to being 3-1 in spite of Ponder's deficiencies.

Looks like you kinda already knew the answer to your question lol.

The bottom line is, Cassel passed the eye test, Ponder failed it every time he took the field. Ponder looks uncomfortable, confused, indecisive and just plain inept. Cassel looked, for all intents and purposes, like an NFL QB. He was better in all immeasurable areas of the game.

Nailed it!

He clearly was better in all aspects of the game.

Mainly, he elevated the play of everyone around him.

I really don't get this line of thinking.

Ponder proved to me long ago he wasn't NFL starting QB material.

Ponder should have been benched in some of his performances earlier in the year.

It's quite obvious that from last Sunday Cassel is much better...thus far anyways.

He is an inferior quarterback, with a weak, inaccurate arm and terrible vision. Cassel gives us a better chance to win.

i thought the difference was night and day.

Looks unanimous ... oh wait ...

That's a POV I've been stating.

Going down with the ship are ya captain?