Page 30 of 42 FirstFirst ... 202829303132 40 ... LastLast
Results 291 to 300 of 417
  1. #291
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Official Christian Ponder Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096163
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096124
    The TJ experiment is over, the childress debacle is over and now we can get back to the reality that you know pretty quickly what you have in a QB.
    So.... Brees anybody?

    320/526 60.8% 3,284yds 6.2avg 17td 16int 24sack 76.9 rate
    Brees' first full year as a starter. What does that tell you? Absolutely dick. Means you got a guy who can sling the rock, but nothing special

    next year, a worse season. He didn't start playing well until year 4. He was picked in the top-32 teams. He was a guy you 'should' be able to start right away. But he wasn't.
    If you go back a few posts of mine you will see that I plainly said stats alone aren't worth anything. Put up the videos of Brees in his first season so we can see whether the stats were from him not knowing what he was doing or from the talent he was playing with and then I will give you a grade. I did watch a quite a bit of Brees play from the time he came out of college and never got the feeling he didn't belong on the field.

  2. #292
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Official Christian Ponder Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096186
    Quote Originally Posted by "Traveling_Vike" #1096165
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096163
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096124
    The TJ experiment is over, the childress debacle is over and now we can get back to the reality that you know pretty quickly what you have in a QB.
    So.... Brees anybody?

    320/526 60.8% 3,284yds 6.2avg 17td 16int 24sack 76.9 rate
    Brees' first full year as a starter. What does that tell you? Absolutely dick. Means you got a guy who can sling the rock, but nothing special

    next year, a worse season. He didn't start playing well until year 4. He was picked in the top-32 teams. He was a guy you 'should' be able to start right away. But he wasn't.

    Glad to see we finally made it back to the real subject of this discussion, i.e. how long you need to properly evaluate a QB's potential.

    I'll just throw one more name out there, and a former Viking to boot. No stats as I am too tired to look them up just now, but this guy was strictly a journeyman for close to ten years before finally turning into a pro-bowl talent.

    Rich Gannon, anyone?

    It's a crap shoot. Always has been, always will be. You never know until you know, and even then sometimes you still don't know.
    Yep, Gannon never really got good until the end of his time here, then went on to the superbowl to play another guy who was never really good until the end of his time here, Brad Johnson.


    It takes a few years to groom a QB to play. Some guys in excellent situations can make it happen right away, most don't.

    I'd rather speed up that process by getting him a Vet to work with and challenge him.
    That is your opinion but not mine.

    He looked pretty decent even in his rookie year and reminded me of Tark the way he moved around in the pocket. Then he hurt his knee and ended up in Green's doghouse for some reason and the Vikings started renewed their trend of signing a washed up veteran or 2 every year instead of just developing him.

    It still pissed me off that we had both Brad Johnson and Gannon on the roster and yet instead of seeing what we had in them and just paying them the million dollars a year it took to keep them, we let them go and just kept trying to plug in the next old b!tch to come along. They both ended up in the SB and we ended up with squat.

  3. #293
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,271

    Re: The Official Christian Ponder Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by "midgensa" #1096160
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096147
    Pretty good stuff there.
    Most "Highlight" video's are. Thus the name "highlight"

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

  4. #294
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,271

    Re: The Official Christian Ponder Thread

    Bob Sansevere: Critics of Vikings draft pick Christian Ponder may be the ones reaching


    http://www.twincities.com/ci_17978606?source=most_viewed

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

  5. #295
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,271

    Re: The Official Christian Ponder Thread

    Bob Sansevere: On and on with former Vikings QB Brad Johnson

    http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_17978637

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

  6. #296
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,778
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: The Official Christian Ponder Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096191
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096163
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096124
    The TJ experiment is over, the childress debacle is over and now we can get back to the reality that you know pretty quickly what you have in a QB.
    So.... Brees anybody?

    320/526 60.8% 3,284yds 6.2avg 17td 16int 24sack 76.9 rate
    Brees' first full year as a starter. What does that tell you? Absolutely dick. Means you got a guy who can sling the rock, but nothing special

    next year, a worse season. He didn't start playing well until year 4. He was picked in the top-32 teams. He was a guy you 'should' be able to start right away. But he wasn't.
    If you go back a few posts of mine you will see that I plainly said stats alone aren't worth anything. Put up the videos of Brees in his first season so we can see whether the stats were from him not knowing what he was doing or from the talent he was playing with and then I will give you a grade. I did watch a quite a bit of Brees play from the time he came out of college and never got the feeling he didn't belong on the field.
    And I've never said, or am not saying that Ponder doesn't belong on the field. I would rather see a guy like McNabb or Hasselbeck out there, helping the kid speed up the learning curve.

    If you stuck guys like Romo, Rodgers, Rivers etc. out there day one, I'm sure they'd have all types of mistakes to make, but they did the learning in practice, where it didn't affect gameplay and when their turn finally came, they played incredible.

    As for Gannon, ok, he looked alright, but never actually like a good QB. He looked like he'd just be an average guy, start for a few years then make way for somebody better. It really started picking up whenhe was on his way out. He only topped 3000 yards once with us, and threw I believe only a couple more TD's than INT's. He wasn't bad, but he wasn't great.

    But you're right, in that I want to get out of signing old washed up vets every year. Difference here though is, we have a legitimate QB prospect on roster, that just needs a little work.

    Previously, we sign old QB's or draft crap players, which is why we grow tired of this situation. There were very few occasions in the history of the team where we had a legitimate QB prospect on our roster that we could groom into OUR QB.

    Besides, last time we drafted a mid-first round QB and had an old vet start that year, it worked out fairly well. Vet played well, First round QB took over in a year and played great. MInd you, we did have one of the best offenses, period. But the play was still good because Pep had a hall of famer to help learn from.

  7. #297
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Official Christian Ponder Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096208
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096191
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096163
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096124
    The TJ experiment is over, the childress debacle is over and now we can get back to the reality that you know pretty quickly what you have in a QB.
    So.... Brees anybody?

    320/526 60.8% 3,284yds 6.2avg 17td 16int 24sack 76.9 rate
    Brees' first full year as a starter. What does that tell you? Absolutely dick. Means you got a guy who can sling the rock, but nothing special

    next year, a worse season. He didn't start playing well until year 4. He was picked in the top-32 teams. He was a guy you 'should' be able to start right away. But he wasn't.
    If you go back a few posts of mine you will see that I plainly said stats alone aren't worth anything. Put up the videos of Brees in his first season so we can see whether the stats were from him not knowing what he was doing or from the talent he was playing with and then I will give you a grade. I did watch a quite a bit of Brees play from the time he came out of college and never got the feeling he didn't belong on the field.
    And I've never said, or am not saying that Ponder doesn't belong on the field. I would rather see a guy like McNabb or Hasselbeck out there, helping the kid speed up the learning curve.

    If you stuck guys like Romo, Rodgers, Rivers etc. out there day one, I'm sure they'd have all types of mistakes to make, but they did the learning in practice, where it didn't affect gameplay and when their turn finally came, they played incredible.

    As for Gannon, ok, he looked alright, but never actually like a good QB. He looked like he'd just be an average guy, start for a few years then make way for somebody better. It really started picking up whenhe was on his way out. He only topped 3000 yards once with us, and threw I believe only a couple more TD's than INT's. He wasn't bad, but he wasn't great.

    But you're right, in that I want to get out of signing old washed up vets every year. Difference here though is, we have a legitimate QB prospect on roster, that just needs a little work.

    Previously, we sign old QB's or draft crap players, which is why we grow tired of this situation. There were very few occasions in the history of the team where we had a legitimate QB prospect on our roster that we could groom into OUR QB.

    Besides, last time we drafted a mid-first round QB and had an old vet start that year, it worked out fairly well. Vet played well, First round QB took over in a year and played great. MInd you, we did have one of the best offenses, period. But the play was still good because Pep had a hall of famer to help learn from.
    And I am not dead set against signing a vet, I just don't want to sign a guy like McNabb who is going to want to be the starter as long as he can and i don't want a guy like Kolb who will cost too much. I have no problem with bringing in a guy who knows their place and is willing to accept that they may start 0, 2 or ten games until either Ponder or Webb are ready but Personally the idea of Ponder on day 1 if we can get him the time with the team is within reach.

  8. #298
    HEY's Avatar
    HEY
    HEY is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    2,201
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Official Christian Ponder Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by "singersp" #1096204
    Bob Sansevere: Critics of Vikings draft pick Christian Ponder may be the ones reaching

    http://www.twincities.com/ci_17978606?source=most_viewed
    :laugh: Good read, and so true!
    The guys who keep calling Ponder a reach is the same guys who praised the draft of JaMarcus Russell and Vince Young. I Loved the tittle!

  9. #299
    Mr Anderson's Avatar
    Mr Anderson is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    7,692

    Re: The Official Christian Ponder Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by "singersp" #1096187
    Quote Originally Posted by "Mr Anderson" #1096155
    Favre was sacked 22(of 36) times in 2010, 4 injuries(that we know about.)
    Favre was sacked 34(of 34) times in 2009, no injuries.
    LOL! It's pretty common knowledge that Favre had surgery on that "no injury" you speak of.

    He was absolutely killed in that game & it wasn't because he always held on to the ball to long.

    Quick question. On the dozens of times AD got nailed in the backfield for a loss, was it because he held onto the ball to long before taking off?

    Definitely in the Buffalo game, Favre had the ball too long, contrary to Infidel's failed attempt at an argument, but several times the pocket collapsed on him almost immediately. The Jets game comes to mind. Don't forget all those forced fumbles that occurred behind the line.
    Those are regular season numbers. Favre's injury occurred in the NFCCG, did it not?

    I'm not trying to say the line is perfect, which is evident by the things you mention(Peterson hit behind the LoS, forced fumbles) but they're not exclusively to blame. Tipping our hand as we have for 4 years allows defenses to key on the run/pass, lack of consistency throughout the team due to injury, and I guess what an only be called "bad luck" all really got to us last year.

    What I'm trying to get across is, Favre got hit less this year than last, but was hurt much more frequently. How does that make the injuries the line's fault? It's logic.

    There are other factors at play. Perhaps Favre's lack of mobility, which was due to an injury(which really was not the line's fault. It was one of Bobby McCray's two dirty hits that game) that prevented him from avoiding really big hits, or properly positioning himself to take a big hit. Maybe his inability to practice with receivers, who frequently were unable to practice themselves, prevented him from developing timing and comfort in getting the ball out quickly or under pressure.

    Either way, there are factors at hand besides o-line play, so to exclusively blame protection for injuries is completely unfair. Especially when you take into consideration the fact that we had injuries everywhere this year. OL, WR, QB, RB, TE, DB, DL - everywhere but LB and P/K was banged up this season. It's not only a QB phenomenon, once again, making it unfair to exclusively blame protection for the injuries.

    Is it coincidence? Strength and conditioning coaching? Inherent flaws in our players' DNA?

    I don't know - so I'm going to blame Childress. Everything was his fault, everyone hated him, now he's gone and everything is going to be better with Frazier in charge.

  10. #300
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: The Official Christian Ponder Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by "Mr Anderson" #1096273
    Those are regular season numbers. Favre's injury occurred in the NFCCG, did it not?

    I'm not trying to say the line is perfect, which is evident by the things you mention(Peterson hit behind the LoS, forced fumbles) but they're not exclusively to blame. Tipping our hand as we have for 4 years allows defenses to key on the run/pass, lack of consistency throughout the team due to injury, and I guess what an only be called "bad luck" all really got to us last year.

    What I'm trying to get across is, Favre got hit less this year than last, but was hurt much more frequently. How does that make the injuries the line's fault? It's logic.

    There are other factors at play. Perhaps Favre's lack of mobility, which was due to an injury(which really was not the line's fault. It was one of Bobby McCray's two dirty hits that game) that prevented him from avoiding really big hits, or properly positioning himself to take a big hit. Maybe his inability to practice with receivers, who frequently were unable to practice themselves, prevented him from developing timing and comfort in getting the ball out quickly or under pressure.

    Either way, there are factors at hand besides o-line play, so to exclusively blame protection for injuries is completely unfair. Especially when you take into consideration the fact that we had injuries everywhere this year. OL, WR, QB, RB, TE, DB, DL - everywhere but LB and P/K was banged up this season. It's not only a QB phenomenon, once again, making it unfair to exclusively blame protection for the injuries.

    Is it coincidence? Strength and conditioning coaching? Inherent flaws in our players' DNA?

    I don't know - so I'm going to blame Childress. Everything was his fault, everyone hated him, now he's gone and everything is going to be better with Frazier in charge.
    Top shelf my friend, top shelf indeed.

    Truth of the matter is, its probably one of your best posts ever and that says something as you've had some pretty damn good ones since I've been visiting this site.

    Said it before and I'll say it again, one day we must meet, so we can suds a few and work the wipe board a bit.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

Page 30 of 42 FirstFirst ... 202829303132 40 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Video: Christian Ponder In Preseason
    By HEY in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-24-2011, 08:49 AM
  2. Christian Ponder named backup QB for the Vikings
    By MulletMullitia in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 09-06-2011, 04:59 PM
  3. NFL speed throws Christian Ponder for a loop
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 08-11-2011, 04:16 PM
  4. Christian Ponder Speaks Truth, Catches Flak
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-05-2011, 04:31 PM
  5. The Officailly official thread for everything official
    By BadlandsVikings in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: 04-17-2008, 11:28 AM

Tags for this Thread

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
  •