Thread: Our Starting QB is Injury Prone
02-04-2012, 11:14 AM #11
Our situation was made worse by our inability to land a solid LT, or a solid RT, or a solid G, or find complimentary receivers, or find Secondary help. We signed a lot of place fillers, but no real talent.
02-04-2012, 11:18 AM #12
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Blog Entries
I think RGIII would be an exciting pick, but what would we do with Ponder? He's only had 1 year and that is NEVER enough time to completely judge a QB. If he had 3 or 4 years under his belt and played like he did this year then yah, take RGIII but right now I'd much prefer to trade down to the Skins or Browns if he's still on the board and solidify our OL and D. I want to see some real offensive talent around Ponder before I jump off the bandwagon. I really think he can be a great QB if he just has some time to throw.I am NOT here to provide good football insight or rational observations. I am an emotional 19 year old Viking fan and I expect you to adjust your expectations from my posts.
02-04-2012, 04:18 PM #14
02-04-2012, 05:09 PM #15
We cut McKinnie because he was a worthless pile of goo who had underperformed season after season. His fat ass was on cruise control. We signed Charlie Johnson because he was all that was available in the 11th hour.
When McKinnie got picked up by Baltimore, I'm fairly certain that he was snapped back into the reality that he had to perform in order to keep his job. That lead to a return to better form...but Bryant, having demonstrated a proclivity towards laziness, will likely return to his slack-assed ways and become a blight on the Ravens O-Line...much like he was here.
So, that said, what options did we have? We could have kept the human turnstile....and our end result would have been the same. Or, we could have cut him and attempted to replace him...which we did. Which LT's did YOU think were better options?
Fact is, as bad as Johnson played, it wasn't far off from the level that McKinnie had been giving us. Will we seek to replace Johnson this season? I certainly hope so. But pointing to THIS as a reason for the Vikings failure is inaccurate. McKinnie brought this on himself. He left the team no choice. It's THAT simple.
02-04-2012, 05:15 PM #16
Chances are, however, that having 2 excellent prospects on our roster will result in us having a solid QB for the future.
That doesn't mean we don't need a new LT....we do....but I think that you build around a QB first. And if RGIII is can be better than Ponder, go get him.
02-04-2012, 05:53 PM #17
Last edited by midgensa; 02-04-2012 at 05:56 PM.
02-04-2012, 05:59 PM #18
02-04-2012, 06:18 PM #19
I'm completely ok with drafting Griffin. The kids a player, and he'll be a staple in the NFL for years to come.
That said, I'm not sure if Ponder is so much injury prone as he would be if he didn't get the David Carr treatment from our OLine. Kevon has a legit concern about his durability, though.
I'm in the same camp as the poster that said that he was ok with drafting any of the top 4 projected guys. We need help at WR, OL, DB, so any of the top players in those respective positions will be a plus (Blackmon, Kalil, either of the top CBs from LSU/Bama).
My main concern about this draft is the middle/late rounds were we seem to miss. Those are the rounds were good and great NFL teams use to fill out their depth with capable players that fit in the scheme, and I haven't seen any of that from the ToA.Vegans are eating the rainforests. =(
02-04-2012, 06:26 PM #20