Page 2 of 19 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 184
  1. #11
    marshallvike's Avatar
    marshallvike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Posts
    2,471
    Quote Originally Posted by 12purplepride28 View Post
    Are you guys kidding me?!?! Last year, aka the first year he had an offseason and his first full year as a starter, was his make-or-break year? You guys make me sick. Even Tarvaris got more time than this and I was fine with it, and Ponder has shown more than he ever did! Jesus H. Christ, I can't believe what I'm reading.
    I haven't given up on him yet 12pp28. This year is where I expect him to make big strides. If that doesn't happen, I will be calling for a new leader along with the rest.
    Why must you defend everything this FO does....to the point of making your self look like a yes man.

  2. #12
    tastywaves's Avatar
    tastywaves is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,869
    Quote Originally Posted by marshallvike View Post
    I haven't given up on him yet 12pp28. This year is where I expect him to make big strides. If that doesn't happen, I will be calling for a new leader along with the rest.
    I think they will look at his progression more than anything else. If he doesn't keep improving, I have no doubt, that the Vikings will move on with someone else.

    The whole "this year is a make or break year" is pretty ridiculous. Some guys get 1 year, some get 5 and some get 2 weeks. If the coaches don't see the potential, they will grab the hook. Not his production, but his potential. Obviously they still believe Ponder has the potential to be a starting QB, but that could change very quickly and now they have someone that they could actually put in the game to take over if Ponder continues to flounder.

  3. #13
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,602
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by 12purplepride28 View Post
    Are you guys kidding me?!?! Last year, aka the first year he had an offseason and his first full year as a starter, was his make-or-break year? You guys make me sick. Even Tarvaris got more time than this and I was fine with it, and Ponder has shown more than he ever did! Jesus H. Christ, I can't believe what I'm reading.
    Cue Singer to complain that TJack never got the chances that Ponder is getting... I love how different perspectives make for opposite conclusions.

    Like I say to Singer, you cannot compare Ponder and TJack. They were completely different QBs and we were looking for different things to improve with each of them.

    I still have hope that Ponder will pan out... I just wouldn't bet money on it.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  4. #14
    vikinggreg's Avatar
    vikinggreg is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    4,772
    Quote Originally Posted by NodakPaul View Post
    Cue Singer to complain that TJack never got the chances that Ponder is getting...

  5. #15
    Reignman is offline Asst. Coach
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    629
    Quote Originally Posted by 12purplepride28 View Post
    Are you guys kidding me?!?! Last year, aka the first year he had an offseason and his first full year as a starter, was his make-or-break year? You guys make me sick. Even Tarvaris got more time than this and I was fine with it, and Ponder has shown more than he ever did! Jesus H. Christ, I can't believe what I'm reading.
    The statistics are not here to back you up my friend, so I don't know how you've arrived at that conclusion.

    Jackson career
    34 starts (17-17), 625 comp, 1053 att (59.4%), 7075 yds (6.72 avg), 38 td, 35 int, 89 sack, 77.7 rating
    159 rushes, 643 yds (4.04 avg), 5 td

    Jackson with the Vikings
    20 starts (10-10), 354 comp, 603 att (58.7%), 3984 yds (6.61 avg), 24 td, 22 int, 47 sack, 76.6 rating
    119 rushes, 535 yds (4.50 avg), 4 td

    Ponder career
    26 starts (12-14), 458 comp, 774 att (59.2%), 4788 yds (6.19 avg), 31td, 25 int, 62 sack, 77.1 rating
    88 rushes, 472 yds (5.36 avg), 2 td

    Do you see a difference? They're statistically identical. If anyone had wished we kept Tjoke, don't worry, we did. If anyone was anti Jackson there's no way in hell they can be pro Ponder. If you didn't think Jackson had any potential then what do you see that makes you believe Ponder has any potential? Just because he was drafted higher? Neither have what it takes to be an effective starter and neither are going to lead a team to a championship.

  6. #16
    Randy Moss's Avatar
    Randy Moss is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    453
    Quote Originally Posted by Reignman View Post
    The statistics are not here to back you up my friend, so I don't know how you've arrived at that conclusion.

    Jackson career
    34 starts (17-17), 625 comp, 1053 att (59.4%), 7075 yds (6.72 avg), 38 td, 35 int, 89 sack, 77.7 rating
    159 rushes, 643 yds (4.04 avg), 5 td

    Jackson with the Vikings
    20 starts (10-10), 354 comp, 603 att (58.7%), 3984 yds (6.61 avg), 24 td, 22 int, 47 sack, 76.6 rating
    119 rushes, 535 yds (4.50 avg), 4 td

    Ponder career
    26 starts (12-14), 458 comp, 774 att (59.2%), 4788 yds (6.19 avg), 31td, 25 int, 62 sack, 77.1 rating
    88 rushes, 472 yds (5.36 avg), 2 td

    Do you see a difference? They're statistically identical. If anyone had wished we kept Tjoke, don't worry, we did. If anyone was anti Jackson there's no way in hell they can be pro Ponder. If you didn't think Jackson had any potential then what do you see that makes you believe Ponder has any potential? Just because he was drafted higher? Neither have what it takes to be an effective starter and neither are going to lead a team to a championship.
    The difference is that Jackson was here for 5 years. He even got to start in year five and wasn't any better than when he played in year 1. We know where his ceiling is and it isn't high enough to be a starter in the NFL.

    Ponder showed improvement from year 1 to year 2, although he did have some crap games, he also had some promising performances. We don't know where his ceiling is. As long as he keeps getting better, we should keep him around.

  7. #17
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,602
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Reignman View Post
    Do you see a difference? They're statistically identical. If anyone had wished we kept Tjoke, don't worry, we did. If anyone was anti Jackson there's no way in hell they can be pro Ponder. If you didn't think Jackson had any potential then what do you see that makes you believe Ponder has any potential? Just because he was drafted higher? Neither have what it takes to be an effective starter and neither are going to lead a team to a championship.
    Of course someone can be anti-TJack and pro-Ponder. They are two different QBs, with different strengths and weaknesses, playing with different surrounding casts under different coaches. Why people keep trying to compare them is beyond me.

    It is also a question of what their last games were like. Like it or not, Ponder played OK in weeks 14-16 and very well in week 17. We then had a chance to see what the team would look like without Ponder in the first playoff game, and it wasn't pretty. Jackson never really finished on a high note, or gave us any reason to have hope.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  8. #18
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266
    Quote Originally Posted by 12purplepride28 View Post
    Are you guys kidding me?!?! Last year, aka the first year he had an offseason and his first full year as a starter, was his make-or-break year? You guys make me sick. Even Tarvaris got more time than this and I was fine with it, and Ponder has shown more than he ever did! Jesus H. Christ, I can't believe what I'm reading.
    No he didn't. Jackson had 20 starts as a Viking where as Ponder has already had 26, which incidentally have been all back to back. Jackson was given 1 season + 2 games the following year before he was replaced as starter.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  9. #19
    VikesfaninWis's Avatar
    VikesfaninWis is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,055
    Ponder hasn't shown any consistency at all. Say what you want about him, whether fair or not, QB's in the NFL are on a short leash. Until Ponder can pick apart defenses, hit the deep pass with consistency, and lead this teams like a true franchise QB should, then he to should be on a short leash. This was a 10 win team last year, you can't stay the same or regress just so you can give your QB enough time to "get it"

  10. #20
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266
    Quote Originally Posted by NodakPaul View Post
    Cue Singer to complain that TJack never got the chances that Ponder is getting... I love how different perspectives make for opposite conclusions.

    Like I say to Singer, you cannot compare Ponder and TJack. They were completely different QBs and we were looking for different things to improve with each of them.

    I still have hope that Ponder will pan out... I just wouldn't bet money on it.
    The difference is when it comes to Jackson, the anti-Jackson crowd look only at the number of years he was here as if he was named the starter all 5 of those years, & totally disregard the actual starts each had. Ponder has had more in his 2 years than Jackson had in 5. That's fact. That doesn't mean Ponder is entitled to 5 years before he can be judged. Some of the same people who wanted Jackson gone after 6 starts in 2007 feel we need to see Ponder play in a minimum of 42 before he can be judged.

    And while there's some truth in that Ponder & Jackson can't be judged apples to apples 100%, the criteria for judging both isn't worlds apart like NP wants us to believe. It's the same WCO and the difference isn't so great that one can be judged after 6 starts, while the other demands 42. A wee bit of a difference there.

    The other thing everyone keeps forgetting, because it doesn't fit into their agenda is that I didn't want Jackson here for 5 years, I wanted him to play all of 2008 rather than benching him & if he didn't pan out, move on without him. I share that same feeling with Ponder. We would be so much further ahead.

    I get ridiculed for saying 14 starts wasn't enough by the same people stating 26 starts isn't enough.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

Page 2 of 19 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •