Thread: IF Ponder truly isn't our guy..

Come on, how many more over-the-hill QBs are we going to waste time on? Minnesota- where old QBs go to die. Do I need to go down the list? Most were busts (McNabb, George) and even the good ones like Moon and Cunningham were good for a year or two. Carson or Vick? Get real. What a disaster either one would be. We need a good YOUNG QB. Personally, I'm sick and tired of watching old retread QBs gasp their dying breaths in Minnesota.

Originally Posted by purplehelmut

Come on, how many more over-the-hill QBs are we going to waste time on? Minnesota- where old QBs go to die. Do I need to go down the list? Most were busts (McNabb, George) and even the good ones like Moon and Cunningham were good for a year or two. Carson or Vick? Get real. What a disaster either one would be. We need a good YOUNG QB. Personally, I'm sick and tired of watching old retread QBs gasp their dying breaths in Minnesota.

I feel you on that... but would you rather have Vick with AD and Harvin or another year of watching inept Ponder try to get his shit together. Frankly I'm tired of it too, but I don't think there are any better options out there in the draft and they are definately better than the alternative. We can't have another year of Ponder as the unquestioned undisputed starter.

Only if we can get Vick for real cheap, like the league minimum. I certainly wouldn' give him big money or more than a one-year deal. I still wouldn't like it. Probably like it as much as the Favre deal, which I despised and subsequently further twisted the knife in my gut after the NFC championship game. I will admit to enjoying the ride up until then though, and developing a grudging respect for Favre. But he was and always will be- a Packer.

Originally Posted by purplehelmut

Only if we can get Vick for real cheap, like the league minimum. I certainly wouldn' give him big money or more than a one-year deal. I still wouldn't like it. Probably like it as much as the Favre deal, which I despised and subsequently further twisted the knife in my gut after the NFC championship game. I will admit to enjoying the ride up until then though, and developing a grudging respect for Favre. But he was and always will be- a Packer.

there is no way Vick gets big money... I think you will see him sign a very reasonable 2year deal maybe 3. for alex Smith like money... about 4-6mil a year. He's due 15M at the end of the league year... he will be cut for sure. that being said, we are giving ponder a reasonable 12m contract over 5years i believe. he's on that cheap rookie deal so we can afford to bring in a quality vet. Other than Vick and the draft options are limited aside from sticking with Ponder.

I however, would like to see an RGIII type spread offense with Joe Webb, AP and Harvin running that offense. swith out vick for webb and use web in the backfield and I think there are lots of creative things we could do with the offense.... but we don't have the brains in our organization to think outside the box and actually curtail our personnel to our best and most athletic players...

Denver Broncos Mike McCoy anyone??

I would really hate our first ring coming with Vick running the offense. That would taint it more than I'd like to imagine, so I say no to Vick. I'd rather see Alex Smith or Matt Flynn.

Originally Posted by bleedpurple

I however, would like to see an RGIII type spread offense with Joe Webb, AP and Harvin running that offense

No Thanks.

There's a reason that the pistol/spread/option has never taken off in the NFL. It requires a real good QB to run it, who's been doing it for years, and alot of luck. Given time, teams will shut it down. If it were truley unstoppable, then the Redskins would have the best Offense in the league. They don't. They're 7-6 and fighting for their playoff lives.

Webb doesn't have the experience running that style of offense. THe difference is RGIII is actually a good thrower, Webb isn't. RGIII has a fantastic play fake and read, Webb hasn't demonstrated that. Teams won't respect the pass on Webb like they do on RGIII, they crash the gaps and play disciplined gap control defense, give up the odd pass, but that's all.

swith out vick for webb and use web in the backfield and I think there are lots of creative things we could do with the offense.... but we don't have the brains in our organization to think outside the box and actually curtail our personnel to our best and most athletic players...

Denver Broncos Mike McCoy anyone??

The issue, is Webb just isn't that good. We tried him at receiver, did next to nothing, we tried him at QB, was very sub-par. He's only really good so far coming off the bench. When given time, teams can easily stop him. Even his "Good Game" was pretty bad by anybody elses standards. If ponder had the same stat line Webb had vs. the Eagles we'd be calling for a replacement.

If you make the overall objective of winning a championship and then do a quick study on the role of the QB by using current history as a marker, a quick study of the teams that have won the SB in the last 20 years shows the following facts:

1) Over the past 20 years, only two teams have won without a prolific QB that played a major role in their team's success. (Bucs w/ Brad Johnson and Ravens w/ Trent Dilfer)
2) Only 6 current QB's have led a franchise to an NFL championship (Brees, Rodgers, Peyton, Eli, Brady and Roethliserger). The other 26 franchises have unproven QB's running their teams.
3) 5 of those 6 QB's were chosen in the top 33 picks of the draft. Only Brady slipped further, going in the 6th round. Two were #1 overall (Mannings), Big Ben was #11 overall, Rodgers #24 and Brees #33.
4) The average years in the league before getting a championship for those 6 QB's was just under 5 years. Brady and Big Ben had the quickest success doing it in their 2nd year in the league.
5) All but one of those 6 QB's won with the team that drafted them. Brees is the exception being traded from San Diego.
6) Current odds on favorite for this year's SB winner are teams led by Brady and Peyton Manning. All but Brees are still in the mix.
7) Only one of those 6 QB's sat on the bench for extended time before getting put into the starter role (Rodgers). He happened to be behind a HOF'er. Brady and Big Ben became starters early in their careers due to injuries by QB's ahead of them on the roster. Brees earned the starting position in his second year.

Assumptions from above:
1) You need a QB that can lead a team to victory and not just be a game manager. Only a few QB's have proven that they can elevate their play when needed. Only 6 current QB's are proven winners in the NFL.
2) The draft is the most likely place to find a guy that will lead you to a championship.
3) It is possible to get early results if you put the QB in the right situation, but most take a few years to develop. Only Eli and Brees took an extended amount of starts before realizing their potential, the others saw success pretty early once installed as starters.
4) At least 25 teams after this year will be trying to find a QB that can lead them to a championship.
5) Those 6 guys have come over a 12 year period of drafts, where many of the guys selected before them have not worked out.

I believe the Vikings made the right choice by drafting Ponder and committing to him. It is fairly apparent to me at this point that he is not going to work out. Odds of him working out were probably pretty low from the start, but if you see something in a guy, you need to take that chance. The importance of the position is very high and the choices in FA are usually long shots and expensive. Scouting teams and systems for success are essential, but you pay the guys to do their job and you have to trust them or get rid of them.

I don't pretend to be a talent scout and can only listen to the talking heads blather like the rest of you. But, if there is a guy available, most likely in the first round, that you think has a chance of being that guy I think you need to take the chance again. Waiting for the next Andrew Luck could be a decade of futility. GB didn't bring in Aaron Rodgers knowing he was the next great thing, they just thought his value at the #24 pick was worth the price, even when they had a perennial pro bowler leading their team.

I don't know where the likes of Barkely or Geno Smith will end up grading out when it's all said and done. Personally I have my doubts on both of them, but if one is available without having to reach too much, I would not be surprised if the Vikings don't pull the trigger and get one of these guys on the roster. The price of giving up the #1 pick on what would most likely be a starting position player is just part of the game that I think you need to play until you land a guy you believe in.

Let them duke it out in TC to see who should start the season.

Great post.

Originally Posted by i_bleed_purple

No Thanks.

There's a reason that the pistol/spread/option has never taken off in the NFL. It requires a real good QB to run it, who's been doing it for years, and alot of luck. Given time, teams will shut it down. If it were truley unstoppable, then the Redskins would have the best Offense in the league. They don't. They're 7-6 and fighting for their playoff lives.

Webb doesn't have the experience running that style of offense. THe difference is RGIII is actually a good thrower, Webb isn't. RGIII has a fantastic play fake and read, Webb hasn't demonstrated that. Teams won't respect the pass on Webb like they do on RGIII, they crash the gaps and play disciplined gap control defense, give up the odd pass, but that's all.



The issue, is Webb just isn't that good. We tried him at receiver, did next to nothing, we tried him at QB, was very sub-par. He's only really good so far coming off the bench. When given time, teams can easily stop him. Even his "Good Game" was pretty bad by anybody elses standards. If ponder had the same stat line Webb had vs. the Eagles we'd be calling for a replacement.

I'm don't agree.... Have you seen what these young mobile QB's are doing around the NFL??? I'm not saying I want Webb at QB... but running that type of offense around the personnel on the current roster I think would be a lot more effective than what we are seeing with Ponder... I think it is somewhat of a gimick offense that teams will catch up to... but guys are completely wide open in the skins offense... and we need to find ways to get Webb on the field... PERIOD!!

Originally Posted by tastywaves

If you make the overall objective of winning a championship and then do a quick study on the role of the QB by using current history as a marker, a quick study of the teams that have won the SB in the last 20 years shows the following facts:

1) Over the past 20 years, only two teams have won without a prolific QB that played a major role in their team's success. (Bucs w/ Brad Johnson and Ravens w/ Trent Dilfer)
2) Only 6 current QB's have led a franchise to an NFL championship (Brees, Rodgers, Peyton, Eli, Brady and Roethliserger). The other 26 franchises have unproven QB's running their teams.
3) 5 of those 6 QB's were chosen in the top 33 picks of the draft. Only Brady slipped further, going in the 6th round. Two were #1 overall (Mannings), Big Ben was #11 overall, Rodgers #24 and Brees #33.
4) The average years in the league before getting a championship for those 6 QB's was just under 5 years. Brady and Big Ben had the quickest success doing it in their 2nd year in the league.
5) All but one of those 6 QB's won with the team that drafted them. Brees is the exception being traded from San Diego.
6) Current odds on favorite for this year's SB winner are teams led by Brady and Peyton Manning. All but Brees are still in the mix.
7) Only one of those 6 QB's sat on the bench for extended time before getting put into the starter role (Rodgers). He happened to be behind a HOF'er. Brady and Big Ben became starters early in their careers due to injuries by QB's ahead of them on the roster. Brees earned the starting position in his second year.

Assumptions from above:
1) You need a QB that can lead a team to victory and not just be a game manager. Only a few QB's have proven that they can elevate their play when needed. Only 6 current QB's are proven winners in the NFL.
2) The draft is the most likely place to find a guy that will lead you to a championship.
3) It is possible to get early results if you put the QB in the right situation, but most take a few years to develop. Only Eli and Brees took an extended amount of starts before realizing their potential, the others saw success pretty early once installed as starters.
4) At least 25 teams after this year will be trying to find a QB that can lead them to a championship.
5) Those 6 guys have come over a 12 year period of drafts, where many of the guys selected before them have not worked out.

I believe the Vikings made the right choice by drafting Ponder and committing to him. It is fairly apparent to me at this point that he is not going to work out. Odds of him working out were probably pretty low from the start, but if you see something in a guy, you need to take that chance. The importance of the position is very high and the choices in FA are usually long shots and expensive. Scouting teams and systems for success are essential, but you pay the guys to do their job and you have to trust them or get rid of them.

I don't pretend to be a talent scout and can only listen to the talking heads blather like the rest of you. But, if there is a guy available, most likely in the first round, that you think has a chance of being that guy I think you need to take the chance again. Waiting for the next Andrew Luck could be a decade of futility. GB didn't bring in Aaron Rodgers knowing he was the next great thing, they just thought his value at the #24 pick was worth the price, even when they had a perennial pro bowler leading their team.

I don't know where the likes of Barkely or Geno Smith will end up grading out when it's all said and done. Personally I have my doubts on both of them, but if one is available without having to reach too much, I would not be surprised if the Vikings don't pull the trigger and get one of these guys on the roster. The price of giving up the #1 pick on what would most likely be a starting position player is just part of the game that I think you need to play until you land a guy you believe in.

Let them duke it out in TC to see who should start the season.

I agree with everything you said aside from Ponder being a good pick.... Pretty much everyone was scratching their head when they took him... they took him extremely high, (would have rather seen a trade back but whatev)... We are all still wondering what the HELL they saw in this dude to take him with the 12th overall pick... 12th overall pick?? what a waste....