Page 4 of 19 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 184
  1. #31
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,601
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by singersp View Post
    I guess your idea of "key situations" differs a lot from mine. For instance, I don't consider the first play of our first possession as "key", nor do I consider 1st downs as key. I also was looking at more than how many first downs he threw as the only criteria. It's a lot easier to complete a high percentage of your passes when most of them aren't sailing beyond 10 yards. You also need to look at the passes he didn't complete or completed short of the first down in key situations.

    In the Bears game 4 of the 7 passes you called key, were on 3rd down. 2 of the remaining 3 were on 1st down passes & the 7th on a 2nd down. Only 1 of those 1st downs happened on a drive that resulted in a score. The remaining 6 happened on drives where we punted due after Ponder had thrown an incompletion, threw short of the 1st down or took a huge sack.

    In the Rams game only 1 of his 9 passes you call key, happened on 3rd down. 2 came on 1st downs including the first play of their first possession. 6 came on 2nd downs of which 2 happened to be more than 5 yards to go. 2 of them happened on a drive that lead to a TD. One of those was their 1st play from scrimmage, the 2nd on 2nd & 6. The key pass on that drive IMO, was a 3rd & 14 where we didn't convert, but came up 1 yard short & went for it on 4th, converted & got the TD.

    After that 1st drive, it was 9 stalled drives & 1 TD run by AD on 1st & 10 at the start of the drive. On 6 of the 9 drives that stalled, on key downs Ponder either threw incomplete passes, passes short of the 1st down or took a sack.

    Now you're definition of OK, may be different than mine, but I saw a lot of bad in those games along with the good. After that 1st drive which amounted to a little less than 1/3 of his total passing yards, he wasn't that OK in the remaining 11 drives.
    You just love to argue, don't you?

    I'm not going to take the bait. Personally I don't care if you are still butt-hurt over Tjack. Complain all you want about Ponder - it isn't going to magically give TJack more time to prove he's a failure. Tjack had more chances than he deserved. Whether or not Ponder gets more chances than TJack got will not change that one bit.

    I do think Ponder played OK in those two game. You don't. Fine. I do think he improved each of those last four games as well, culminating in week 17. I don't think he will be the starter by the end of the year, and I don't think he will be the starter next year.
    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=

  2. #32
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by MulletMullitia View Post
    Teddy Bridgewater or Johnny Football please! I'll give Ponder a year. But next year's QB class is way too good to give Ponder more than a year. Definite franchise opportunity, unlike this year! You will see that when desperate teams like the Cardinals or Bills reach for a QB too high because they had to. Like we had to with Ponder. We HAD to draft a QB. Nobody in the world thought 3 QBs would be off the board by 12. Gabbert to JAX and Locker to TEN gave us no choice. Hopefully Spielman and Studwell recognize that and realize that franchise talent at the QB position is too valuable and rare to pass up, even if you just spent a first rounder on a guy that didn't pan out.
    I am a huge Johnny Football fan and would love to have him as our QB but I fear he is going to end up with the Jets.

  3. #33
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266
    Quote Originally Posted by NodakPaul View Post
    You just love to argue, don't you?

    I'm not going to take the bait. Personally I don't care if you are still butt-hurt over Tjack. Complain all you want about Ponder - it isn't going to magically give TJack more time to prove he's a failure. Tjack had more chances than he deserved. Whether or not Ponder gets more chances than TJack got will not change that one bit.

    I do think Ponder played OK in those two game. You don't. Fine. I do think he improved each of those last four games as well, culminating in week 17. I don't think he will be the starter by the end of the year, and I don't think he will be the starter next year.
    I'm not arguing. Just pointing out why I don't see his play as being OK as you do.

    Whether or not we feel his play was OK in those two games has nothing to do with Jackson, nothing at all.

    I'm not butt hurt over Jackson. People act as if I thought the guy was a superstar, when I never did. All I ever did was state that he should be playing all of 2008 so they could decide to keep him if he improved or cut him & move on to a new QB in 2009 if he didn't.

    The brain trust, IMO, screwed the pooch & benched him instead which kept him on the roster 2 additional years rather than let him go after 2008. That's 2 years we could have had in finding our next starting QB, but yet so many people had a problem with that.

    The same goes for Ponder. They needed to play him all last year to see what they have and move on from there. He's had 26 games already & IMO, has been erratic as well putting in a good game here & there benefiting from AD's 2,100 yards, YAC after 5 yard dumps, good field position & a FG kicker capable of putting up 50+ yard FG's & who put up more points with his leg, than Ponder did with his arm.

    Now he's been named the uncontested starter for the next 16 games. If they bench him due to poor play & insert Cassel, then I hope they cut their losses & move on without Ponder, rather than keeping him on the bench for two more years.

    To be honest, I believe we lack the quality of coaches needed to train & teach a young QB to play well & have so for years. The success we've had that can be attributed to solid QB play has came from QB's who learned elsewhere.
    Last edited by singersp; 04-08-2013 at 07:00 AM.

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

  4. #34
    jmcdon00's Avatar
    jmcdon00 is offline Jersey Retired Snake Champion, Moto Trial Fest 2: Mountain Pack Champion, LL City Truck 2 Champion, Arithmetic sequence Champion, Troops Tower Defense Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,278
    Quote Originally Posted by singersp View Post
    I'm not butt hurt over Jackson. People act as if I thought the guy was a superstar, when I never did. All I ever did was state that he should be playing all of 2008 so they could decide to keep him if he improved or cut him & move on to a new QB in 2009 if he didn't.

    The brain trust, IMO, screwed the pooch & benched him instead which kept him on the roster 2 additional years rather than let him go after 2008. That's 2 years we could have had in finding our next starting QB, but yet so many people had a problem with that.
    I think they did move on after 2008, hence why Brett Favre was brought in for 2009 and 2010. They didn't cut Tjack because he was a decent backup under contract that didn't cost a lot of money.
    I think we could see a similar situation with Ponder, where he gets replaced as the starter but they keep him around because he's a quality back-up who's under contract(although probably making a bit more than T-Jack ever did, increasing his chances of being cut if replaced as the starter).

  5. #35
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266
    Quote Originally Posted by jmcdon00 View Post
    I think they did move on after 2008, hence why Brett Favre was brought in for 2009 and 2010. They didn't cut Tjack because he was a decent backup under contract that didn't cost a lot of money.
    I think we could see a similar situation with Ponder, where he gets replaced as the starter but they keep him around because he's a quality back-up who's under contract(although probably making a bit more than T-Jack ever did, increasing his chances of being cut if replaced as the starter).
    I disagree with that. Favre was brought in for a "win now" season & I believe they kept Jackson around because they didn't know for sure if he'd pan out or not & they felt a year watching Favre might do him some good. If they were truly down with him in 08, then you would think they would have looked for their next QB in the 2009 draft to learn under Favre or especially in the 2010 draft when Jackson's rookie contract expired & they resigned him instead of drafting a future QB.

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

  6. #36
    Reignman is offline Asst. Coach
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    629
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Moss View Post
    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.
    Singer has already argued this point for me, but yeah the fact that Jackson was jerked around for 5 years probably hurt him more than helped whereas when Ponder was handed the reigns he never had to look over his shoulder. In these 2 different situations I would expect Ponders numbers to be considerably better. And again, how did people know Jackson was at his ceiling so early, but after 26 starts we still think Ponder hasn't reached his? I'm far from being a Jackson supporter, I was calling for his head early on, but I sense a double standard when it comes to Ponder. Jackson had his share of "promising" games as well. And Ponder has had way more stinker games than promising.

    Quote Originally Posted by NodakPaul View Post
    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.
    You're right, they are different, but who cares how different they are if they give you the same result? They both suck differently, it doesn't matter, the point is they both suck.

    Quote Originally Posted by NodakPaul View Post
    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.
    I'm going to ignore how fans think Ponder played well in the final 4 games because I'm tired of that argument and Singer summed it up well already, but I would like to add that Tjoke never had the benefit of handing off to a record chasing AD. Ponder didn't play well, AD played out of his mind which commanded the full attention of defenses. Ponder did do a good job of handing off. I believe there were no hand off exchange fumbles.

    Quote Originally Posted by RK. View Post
    Its all relative Singer. Those are better numbers than his previous games. Its like hitting your thumb with a hammer and feeling good that you didn't cut it off with a saw.
    Yes but fans that think Ponder is better than Tjoke are like a guy that hits his thumb with a hammer and then cuts it off with a saw to get rid of the pain. Haha sorry, I couldn't resist.

    Quote Originally Posted by vikinggreg View Post
    But back to Ponder last year wasn't the make or break as we found out with Webb as the backup it really was an all in year for Ponder cause there was no plan B. When I thought Ponder should have been sat for poor play like the Tampa game for an example and Webb put in for a change, a better chance for the team, protect Ponder from himself, well it just turns out Webb just not the answer and it would appear the staff knew this; they might not have wanted to admit it or have us see it.
    So you're saying Frazier and company knew Webb was that terrible and kept him on the roster as the #2 anyway and cut Sage instead? Perhaps Webb looked that terrible because he didn't get to play until January. Maybe if he came in in some of those games when Ponder was sub 100 late, he might have been more polished in January. And at the very least we would have found out Webb was terrible earlier, and we could have come up with a better backup plan.

    Quote Originally Posted by NodakPaul View Post
    And how did I get OK out of weeks 14 and 15? Well, by watching them, not just looking at the stats on paper out of context.
    Statistics aside, I watched the games as well and have come to a completely different conclusion. Ponder looks awful to me. He looks scared most of the time, he has happy feet, his accuracy down field sucks, his roll outs scare the hell out of me, especially when he rolls left, the floaters are pissing me off, and don't get me started on his deep ball (see deep ball to AD at Lambeau). The statistics just happen to reflect my conclusion. I Just don't know how you can spin 91 yards passing and 0 TD's into being a good game. You're like a magician lol.

    Quote Originally Posted by NodakPaul View Post
    I do think Ponder played OK in those two game. You don't. Fine. I do think he improved each of those last four games as well, culminating in week 17. I don't think he will be the starter by the end of the year, and I don't think he will be the starter next year.
    And you don't think that culmination in week 17 had anything to do with what AD was on the verge of doing? I mean don't you think the Packers were 100% focused on stopping AD and wouldn't that make it much easier for any QB?

    Quote Originally Posted by NodakPaul View Post
    I don't think he will be the starter by the end of the year, and I don't think he will be the starter next year.
    If it's more of the same, I hope you're right, but I hope Ponder can finally turn the corner and prove me wrong because if he doesn't this franchise is going to be set back another few years and AD isn't getting any younger.

  7. #37
    jmcdon00's Avatar
    jmcdon00 is offline Jersey Retired Snake Champion, Moto Trial Fest 2: Mountain Pack Champion, LL City Truck 2 Champion, Arithmetic sequence Champion, Troops Tower Defense Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,278
    Quote Originally Posted by singersp View Post
    I disagree with that. Favre was brought in for a "win now" season & I believe they kept Jackson around because they didn't know for sure if he'd pan out or not & they felt a year watching Favre might do him some good. If they were truly down with him in 08, then you would think they would have looked for their next QB in the 2009 draft to learn under Favre or especially in the 2010 draft when Jackson's rookie contract expired & they resigned him instead of drafting a future QB.
    I agree Favre was brought in to "win now". If they though Tjack was the answer they would have tried to "win now" with Tjack. I've never heard of a team going out and getting a veteran to be the starter when they believe they have a 3rd year franchise QB on the team already.
    I'm sure they still had hopes for Tjack, as they do with every player on the team, but they weren't putting all their eggs in the Tjack basket.

  8. #38
    RK.'s Avatar
    RK.
    RK. is offline Ring of Fame Rally Cross II Champion
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    4,458
    To be honest, I believe we lack the quality of coaches needed to train & teach a young QB to play well & have so for years. The success we've had that can be attributed to solid QB play has came from QB's who learned elsewhere.
    However TJack went to Seattle and new coach's there didn't seem to help much.

    The problem I have with Ponder is arm strength. I am not sure coaching can help with that. I am sure that is why we see very little passing game 10 yds beyond the LOS. Hopefully he is on the bow flex this off season building up those muscles. You won't make it as a QB in the NFL unless you can gun it down the field. You have to put it through the window not just float it over the wall.

    WWBGD

  9. #39
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,601
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by RK. View Post
    However TJack went to Seattle and new coach's there didn't seem to help much.

    The problem I have with Ponder is arm strength. I am not sure coaching can help with that. I am sure that is why we see very little passing game 10 yds beyond the LOS. Hopefully he is on the bow flex this off season building up those muscles. You won't make it as a QB in the NFL unless you can gun it down the field. You have to put it through the window not just float it over the wall.
    BINGO!

    This is my belief EXACTLY. I actually give Musgrave a lot of credit for figuring out a way to work with Ponder than makes him semi-effective. I know it is popular to rip on the coaches, but in this instance I honestly believe that Musgrave is a pretty good OC. Look at what he did with a poor WR corps and a QB with a questionable arm.
    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=

  10. #40
    C Mac D's Avatar
    C Mac D is offline Posting to P'own
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    13,490
    ... and if Ponder went to Seattle, he wouldn't improve much either.

    Love how accepting people are of Ponder's mediocre play, yet TJack got more than his fair share of venom thrown at him for his mediocre play. Wonder why...

    Career stats:

    Ponder
    Cmp - 458
    Att - 774
    Cmp % - 59.2%
    TD - 31
    INT - 25
    Y/C - 10.5
    Rating - 77.1

    Jackson
    Cmp - 625
    Att - 1053
    Cmp % - 59.4%
    TD - 38
    INT - 35
    Y/C - 11.3
    Rating - 77.7
    Last edited by C Mac D; 04-09-2013 at 01:54 PM.
    Disclaimer: I'm an idiot.

Page 4 of 19 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... 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
  •