Packers post game thread.

**kingpin9995** · 12-05-2012, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by Purple Floyd

That is my thought as well. If they don't have enough faith in him to come in and give the team a boost when needed, then what do they expect would happen if Ponder got hurt and he ws the one and only starter? If you don't have a competent backup in this league you are setting yourself up for trouble unless you are GB who can go 20 years without having to rely on a backup for mare than a game.

I don't know about you but when my quarterback goes 7 possesions without completing one pass for a span of 35 game time minutes I would think that it's fair to say ANY backup would be the option to use to try and win the most important game of the year and not be obsessed with the thought of our great coach of creating a qb controversy. The fact is Webb has come in relief and won a game and beat a philly team starting. He would have changed of the game and given the defense something to fear if not with just Webbs athletic ability. Frasier erred on the side of worrying about a qb controversy instead of trying at any means to win a pivotal game.

**tastywaves** · 12-05-2012, 10:07 AM

Originally Posted by kingpin9995

I don't know about you but when my quarterback goes 7 possesions without completing one pass for a span of 35 game time minutes I would think that it's fair to say ANY backup would be the option to use to try and win the most important game of the year and not be obsessed with the thought of our great coach of creating a qb controversy. The fact is Webb has come in relief and won a game and beat a philly team starting. He would have changed of the game and given the defense something to fear if not with just Webbs athletic ability. Frasier erred on the side of worrying about a qb controversy instead of trying at any means to win a pivotal game.

I think it's worse than that. I think Frazier kept Ponder in because he felt he gave them the best chance to win. That's my bigger concern.

**kingpin9995** · 12-05-2012, 12:21 PM

Great point. If that is the case he's going to lose this team very quickly from here out. The veterans on this team know that they had a very good chance to beat the Peckers. They would have been in very good shape going into the Bears game with a win, and probably right in it till the end. Losing pretty much shuts them out as the teams tied with them for the wild card all have the tie breaker on us as we lost to them all. Either he's dumber than I thought or Speilman is making the call on pulling Ponder. Sunday will be very interesting. It could get brutal in the dome.

**keystonevike** · 12-05-2012, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by vikesrgreat2

From reading these posts, it seems that Ponder is not the most popular player on the team now. After his performance yesterday, that's certainly understandable.

However, it seems to me our current 1-4 slump is more centered on the following:

1. The Vikings' inability to stretch the field at WR. In the offseason, I think it's critical for the Vikings to find a WR with speed and good hands - either through free agency or the draft. If Mike Wallace or Dwayne Bowe is the answer here, then the Vikings can address other needed areas of the team via the draft. Otherwise, WR seems to be a high draft priority.

2. The defense not getting off the field on third down. Remember when the Packers held the ball for the first 11 minutes of the fourth quarter? That backbreaking drive got them the victory. Having Green Bay drive the ball down the Vikings' throats like that is unacceptable in my opinion.

I'm not sure that Ponder is the long-term answer for the Vikings at QB. However, I feel we need to remember that we were 3-13 last year, and we have doubled our last season's win total with 4 games to go! I feel that, if the team panics and replaces the head coaches and/or lots of coaches on the staff, then the Vikings start over again from square one. We're not far from the playoffs now - let's not take a step backward!

Yes, we did double our win total from last season, but if we continue to fade down the stretch, it will make that fact look like so much window dressing. We got out of the gate real good, but now we're just not stumbling but flat out sliding. Granted, our 2nd half of the schedule is very difficult, but this was a very winnable game, and we didn't close it out. And that to me says we have made little to no progress

**Purple Floyd** · 12-05-2012, 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by keystonevike

Yes, we did double our win total from last season, but if we continue to fade down the stretch, it will make that fact look like so much window dressing. We got out of the gate real good, but now we're just not stumbling but flat out sliding. Granted, our 2nd half of the schedule is very difficult, but this was a very winnable game, and we didn't close it out. And that to me says we have made little to no progress

To keep it in perspective, Doubling our win total still only puts us at the number of wins that got the last coach fired and 3 less than the number that got the one before him fired.

**NodakPaul** · 12-05-2012, 06:09 PM

Originally Posted by Purple Floyd

To keep it in perspective, Doubling our win total still only puts us at the number of wins that got the last coach fired and 3 less than the number that got the one before him fired.

Pretty sure that Childress wasn't fired after his 12-4 season, and Green wasn't fired after 15-1... I think it might have been the 3-7 record Childress was rocking in 2010 or the 5-10 that Green was at in 2001.

Although, to be honest, I disagreed with the firing of Green. 2001 was the only losing season of his 10 years in Minnesota, and only the second time he failed to make the playoffs.

**Purple Floyd** · 12-05-2012, 08:54 PM

Originally Posted by NodakPaul

Pretty sure that Childress wasn't fired after his 12-4 season, and Green wasn't fired after 15-1... I think it might have been the 3-7 record Childress was rocking in 2010 or the 5-10 that Green was at in 2001.

Although, to be honest, I disagreed with the firing of Green. 2001 was the only losing season of his 10 years in Minnesota, and only the second time he failed to make the playoffs.

Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't the team sitting at 6 wins the year Childress got fired? Maybe I am wrong and i am 100% sure you will make sure to correct me if I am. And secondly- Wasn't there a coach between Green and Childress? I think his name was Tice? What was his record when he got fired?

Otherwise I have no friggin idea what the heck your point is or what the thing you posted had to do with what i did.

Carry on.

**singersp** · 12-07-2012, 07:22 AM

Originally Posted by Chazz

Do you really think we could of afforded the price Washington gave up for him with all our glaring holes? Besides you can't argue moving up as being able to get him. It takes two to dance and they need be interested, which we could never know.

Bottom line is he wasn't available at pick 3 therefor we couldn't of had him.

It's not merely a question of afford as much as it is how bad do you want him.

To say you can't argue moving up from 3rd to 2nd with a trade is 100% ridiculous. Moving up in the draft, a lot farther up than we would have had to I might add, is exactly what Washington did.

To say we could never know they'd be interested in a trade is equally absurd. If they made a trade with the Redskins, it's quite obvious they were willing to trade.

**NodakPaul** · 12-07-2012, 08:05 AM

Originally Posted by Purple Floyd

Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't the team sitting at 6 wins the year Childress got fired? Maybe I am wrong and i am 100% sure you will make sure to correct me if I am. And secondly- Wasn't there a coach between Green and Childress? I think his name was Tice? What was his record when he got fired?

Otherwise I have no friggin idea what the heck your point is or what the thing you posted had to do with what i did.

Carry on.

Nope, the team was 3-7 when Childress got fired. Frazier came in and went 3-3 to finish the season. Hence my confusion about the Childress remark.

But I did forget about Tice.

**Chazz** · 12-07-2012, 09:18 AM

Originally Posted by singersp

Originally Posted by Chazz

Do you really think we could of afforded the price Washington gave up for him with all our glaring holes? Besides you can't argue moving up as being able to get him. It takes two to dance and they need be interested, which we could never know.

Bottom line is he wasn't available at pick 3 therefor we couldn't of had him.

It's not merely a question of afford as much as it is how bad do you want him.

To say you can't argue moving up from 3rd to 2nd with a trade is 100% ridiculous. Moving up in the draft, a lot farther up than we would have had to I might add, is exactly what Washington did.

To say we could never know they'd be interested in a trade is equally absurd. If they made a trade with the Redskins, it's quite obvious they were willing to trade.

Its ridiculous and absurd to claim to know they would be willing to trade to US. Washington gave them a deal they couldn't refuse. They is no way we could beat it without a Hershel Walker type disaster.

Rebuilding teams can't afford to throw away draft picks. So no, we couldn't AFFORD it.