Ponder is still the biggest question mark and I doubt he's going to turn into a superstar overnight. Will he get better is the question. Will the increased talent and experience help him or is he reaching his ceiling? Not expecting greatness by any means, and if he doesn't continue to go forward I would expect him to get pulled at some point in the season.
One other thing I wonder about is how much of the passing offense in a place like Green Bay is due to the QB and how much is due to the overall system/emphasis/talent. Rodgers is a great QB, I have no question, but if you put him in a place like MN as a rookie, what would he look like and how would he develop?
Rodgers, Brees, and Eli did not smoke the league in their first two seasons, so there is some hope for Ponder.
In his second year as the starting QB in MN, Ponder threw for 2,934 yards (1,500 yds. less), threw 18 TD's (12 less) to 12 INTS (5 more), completed 62.1% of his passes (2.6% less) & averaged 6.1 yds/pass (2.1 yds/pass less).
No. Why would you label our offense as dink/dunk but the Packers as Coryell when the Packers are running or have been running the exact same offense as we have for a long time. Do you not remember how Brett was able to come here and run the plays right away because he already had been running the plays for nearly 20 years in GB? They still run the same offense today.Quote:
You see the thing I did were I broke down the Vikings, (Dink Dunk), The Pats (Dink Dunk) and the PUKERS (Coryell)?
The Coryell offense used the run to set up the pass and had totally different read progressions than what GB runs or what we run. Look to Dallas and San Diego and probably Oakland although they change shit too fast these days to keep track of.
Well, I am rooting for Ponder because I don't want to go through another QB search but he has not been good at deep passes and it hasn't been the WR's that were the problem. Can he fix his problems? Maybe. But it remains to be seen.Quote:
All of them were in the 2 to 5 range (Avg) per game on deep passes. I think we will all see that one of the benifits of actually having a starter at each position (X, Y, and Z) as well as the flexibility to move a couple of them around will greatly increase the completion percentages of the "Deep" passes everyone seems to think Ponder can't make, even though he has to some extent at this level and was pretty consistent with at the collegiate level.
Rodgers was able to sit and learn from a quarterback that knew how to study game film, exploit defenses, and get the ball out of the pocket. Ponder got a half season watching a quarterback who was not enough of a team player to even stick around after he was benched and a year and a half starting in front of a quarterback who had no NFL experience.
I am aware what Aaron Rodgers did in his second season starting. On another website, I defended the Packers drafting Rodgers against Vikings fans that said he was a bust because Rodgers could not unseat the future Hall of Fame quarterback they already had. That second season starting made many Vikings fans, and unbelieving Packers fans for that matter, eat a lot of crow.
WR corp before having to start his 1st game with a new team?
As bad as McNabb was, he still completed a higher percentage of his passes, threw for more yards per game, had less interceptions per game, had a higher yards per pass average & maintained a higher rating than Ponder did in 2011 & still after 2012, Ponder has yet to best most of those.
Ponder certainly isn't lighting the NFL on fire but to even suggest that his play is as bad as or worse than McNabbs is ridiculous if you watched any of the games with your eyeballs. if you rely on dredging stats you may be able to make a correlation but it would not be accurate. McNabb was the single worst QB we have had in a long time.