Thread: Ponder’s Role Solidified?

Originally Posted by Reignman

Hold the phone, maybe I can help end this debate with a simple little chart.



If you didn't think TJoke was the answer, there's no reason for you to believe Ponder is the answer. And 3 teams have given up on the first guy already.

They'll insult stats when they go against their argument... but use stats when they help prove their argument. It's true though, there's not much different in Ponder's play verses Jackson's. For some reason though, people are much more willing to give Ponder time to develop.

A lot of fans on these boards had something against Jackson other than his play on the football field... that much is for sure - interpret that as you will. Ponder has been just as mediocre as Jackson ever was, but he doesn't get nearly as much venom thrown his way. That's just a fact.

Originally Posted by NodakPaul

Ah yes, the stat chart. Obviously the best way to evaluate a player. Because the stats ALWAYS tell the whole story, and they DEFINITELY account for any external factors...

And I guess emoticons are an intelligent argument?

Originally Posted by C Mac D

They'll insult stats when they go against their argument... but use stats when they help prove their argument. It's true though, there's not much different in Ponder's play verses Jackson's. For some reason though, people are much more willing to give Ponder time to develop.

A lot of fans on these boards had something against Jackson other than his play on the football field... that much is for sure - interpret that as you will. Ponder has been just as mediocre as Jackson ever was, but he doesn't get nearly as much venom thrown his way. That's just a fact.

Duh!

Originally Posted by C Mac D

It's true though, there's not much different in Ponder's play verses Jackson's. For some reason though, people are much more willing to give Ponder time to develop.

Can'r say I disagree with that.

A lot of fans on these boards had something against Jackson other than his play on the football field... that much is for sure - interpret that as you will. Ponder has been just as mediocre as Jackson ever was, but he doesn't get nearly as much venom thrown his way. That's just a fact.

Part of that might have been that Jackson had a better team around him at the time and he was basically the weak link in the chain. This team had far lower expectations(is that really a good thing?) so they are not holding him as much at fault for things. but I do agree there is probably some undercurrent of bias.

Originally Posted by C Mac D

And I guess emoticons are an intelligent argument?

Originally Posted by Purple Floyd

Originally Posted by tastywaves

Kevon, I know how much you love strong arm quarterback's. But, there is a lot more that goes into being a successful QB than how well you can throw the ball. I'm not saying Ponder has earned any level of respect at this point, but I'm not convinced that swapping him with Cutler would make us a better team.

And you can stop with your myth about how any decent QB would be instant HOF'ers with Peterson in the backfield. It sounds good, but it doesn't have any meat behind it. Much of Peterson's success comes because MN is a run first oriented offense. Being good at running the ball, doesn't equate to more success in passing the ball. Actually quite the opposite is true as has been pointed out many times in these multitude of threads.

Your same argument could be used to say that GB should instantly have one of the best running games in the league because of their prolific passing ability that causes defenses to focus on shutting that done over anything else. I would wager that if you put Peterson in GB or NE, that he would have less production than he has today with MN.

Cutler has a much better arm than Ponder, but that doesn't necessarily make him a better QB. Ponder may never improve from where he is at today and may very well not be the answer for MN. But saying Cutler makes us instant contenders is bit of a stretch for me as well.

LOL, great post. You should have pointed out how strong of an arm Joe Montanna had and how critical it was to him winning running a scheme that is a direct variant of our scheme.

Originally Posted by C Mac D

They'll insult stats when they go against their argument... but use stats when they help prove their argument. It's true though, there's not much different in Ponder's play verses Jackson's. For some reason though, people are much more willing to give Ponder time to develop.

A lot of fans on these boards had something against Jackson other than his play on the football field... that much is for sure - interpret that as you will. Ponder has been just as mediocre as Jackson ever was, but he doesn't get nearly as much venom thrown his way. That's just a fact.

You're right about most of this, even if it seems to run counter to my points. I'll say that I've seen more improvement out of Ponder than I did Jackson, and Ponder was viewed as a better quarterback prospect than Jackson by just about everybody. Ponder was a pretty big reach where he went, as most had him going early 2nd, late 1st. When Jackson got drafted, people were asking who he was.

Still, there was a definite improvement and progression from Ponder's first year to his second. I hope to see this as a continuing trend, as it bodes well for our frachise.

To be honest, I was hoping that we'd have found a way to score Jake Locker. Woops.

Originally Posted by Ranger

You're right about most of this, even if it seems to run counter to my points. I'll say that I've seen more improvement out of Ponder than I did Jackson, and Ponder was viewed as a better quarterback prospect than Jackson by just about everybody. Ponder was a pretty big reach where he went, as most had him going early 2nd, late 1st. When Jackson got drafted, people were asking who he was.

Still, there was a definite improvement and progression from Ponder's first year to his second. I hope to see this as a continuing trend, as it bodes well for our frachise.

To be honest, I was hoping that we'd have found a way to score Jake Locker. Woops.

Something we can all be thankful didn't happen.

Titans would be better off with Jackson.

Originally Posted by C Mac D

They'll insult stats when they go against their argument... but use stats when they help prove their argument. It's true though, there's not much different in Ponder's play verses Jackson's. For some reason though, people are much more willing to give Ponder time to develop.

A lot of fans on these boards had something against Jackson other than his play on the football field... that much is for sure - interpret that as you will. Ponder has been just as mediocre as Jackson ever was, but he doesn't get nearly as much venom thrown his way. That's just a fact.

I think there is a hell of a lot of difference between Ponder's play and Jackson's play. The stats are similar, yes. But how they got to those stats are very different. Jackson had a great arm but was horribly inaccurate and made piss poor decisions. Ponder has a weak arm but is fairly accurate (and makes piss poor decisions). I see very little similarity in their style of play, and don't think that any comparison of the two based on stats alone is productive.

Stats without context are meaningless, something I have said many, many times over the years.

Regarding the animosity toward Ponder or Jackson, I actually think that Ponder and Jackson have about the same amount of haters and venom. Hell, there were a lot of people here who were destroying Ponder and calling him ever effeminate name they could think of because he didn't play in the playoff game. Had he played and sucked those same people would be complaining. It ebbs and flows with every player of course, and right now Ponder played well in his last four game, so it tends to take a lot of the steam out of the arguments against him. I don't ever remember Jackson putting together a string of 4 consecutive decent games.

What I find most interesting is that the majority of people who complain about that issue were the ones who were pro-TJack before and didn't have much support, and somehow the fact that people aren't rallying around them when they complain about Ponder is some kind of personal insult. Or maybe they just feel like they have less support because the opposition to a person's view is always more noticeable. I say get over it. Ponder is not TJack, and comparisons to him serve no purpose. JMHO.

Oh yeah, and