Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 71 to 75 of 75
  1. #71
    drewlovs's Avatar
    drewlovs is offline Asst. Coach
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    587
    Quote Originally Posted by TeamSoftware View Post
    I watch the Vikings because football is fun to watch and I am from MN. Ponder and Frazier have no fire, which makes the games less fun. At least with Cassel there was a sense of urgency you could see in the players which made the game at least fun to watch.

    Even my wife said the game was fun to watch again.



    --Scott
    I COMPLETELY agree!!

  2. #72
    Traveling_Vike is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    885
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeus View Post
    Ponder, Cassel - hell, MBT! Won't matter a damn bit if the Vikings' D can't start stopping people.

    =Z=
    Amen, brother. This fourth quarter idiocy has to stop. I lay it more at the feet of the coaches, but the players bear some responsibility, too. The whole philosophy of "get ahead and then don't lose" is garbage.

    My Meeple is purple. What color is yours?

  3. #73
    Traveling_Vike is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    885
    Quote Originally Posted by kevoncox View Post
    1. We were also playing a better team.
    2. We were down 3 starters in the defensive backfield.

    Chose the eyeball test or the stats test. In both test Cassell wins. He isn't as bad a Qb as people thinks and I have been screaming this. He is a 25td - 14int - 3500 yard Qb and that is all we need.
    Thanks for the feedback, Kevon. I certainly did not mean to imply that I thought Cassel was bad, in any way shape or form. I've been a supporter of his for years, and believe that with a decent supporting cast, he can be a more-than-adequate starter in this league.

    My only real point here is that he's only been on the field once for us, and that is too small a sample size to jump to conclusions. He looked better than Ponder, to be sure. But will he continue to do so? Only one way to find out. Play him a couple more times and judge from that.

    My suspicion at this point is that he would win the job, but I'm not going to hand it to him for one game's performance, especially given that the end of the game looked eerily similar to the prior two with Ponder. We were lucky to get the stop this time, but we should never have been in that position in the first place. Cassel vs. Ponder had no bearing on that. It was all on the defensive philosophy and execution.

    You should never ease up unless you are so far ahead that it is impossible for the opponent to mount a comeback. And even if they do start to, you go back to being aggressive gain in order to stop them. Step on their necks and finish it, instead of letting them inch back into it.

    My Meeple is purple. What color is yours?

  4. #74
    Minniman's Avatar
    Minniman is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,415
    Quote Originally Posted by Traveling_Vike View Post
    My only real point here is that he's only been on the field once for us, and that is too small a sample size to jump to conclusions. He looked better than Ponder, to be sure. But will he continue to do so? Only one way to find out. Play him a couple more times and judge from that.
    Cassel's mechanics, reads, progressions, and passes were much better. If he keeps his head, he should play better. He did make a few mistakes that could have been picks, but Ponder threw picks and had balls thrown that could have been picked. All quarterbacks fumble, so that cannot be held against Cassel unless it becomes a habit.

    My suspicion at this point is that he would win the job, but I'm not going to hand it to him for one game's performance, especially given that the end of the game looked eerily similar to the prior two with Ponder. We were lucky to get the stop this time, but we should never have been in that position in the first place. Cassel vs. Ponder had no bearing on that. It was all on the defensive philosophy and execution.
    It was both the offensive philosophy and defensive philosophy. The offense went conservative, and the defense played soft. Good teams go for the jugular. High percentage passes mixed with runs that create sustained drives are the death nail to the comeback. First downs take far more time off the clock than a couple runs. Anyone who watched the 1998 NFCC game knows that handcuffing a potent offense allows the other team to come back.

    The Vikings go into a thirty second offense with two or three minutes left every time every year. They play a deep zone and give up huge chunks of yardage that do not force drive ending plays. Dropping defenders seven yards back on third and six is asking for another set of downs and a better chance for a big play. If you want to stop an offense, get them off the field.

  5. #75
    Reignman is offline Asst. Coach
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    629
    Quote Originally Posted by Traveling_Vike View Post
    This fourth quarter idiocy has to stop. I lay it more at the feet of the coaches, but the players bear some responsibility, too. The whole philosophy of "get ahead and then don't lose" is garbage.
    I couldn't agree more. This playing not to lose crap is worse now than it was with Chilly. We could be 3-1 if we had shown a little more guts on offense late in the Bears and Browns games. In both games we had the lead and the BALL with minutes to go. Then we did it again in the Steelers game. It's almost unbelievable.

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678

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
  •