So how much longer do we give Ponder?

[NorthernLights88]

I'll admit upfront that while he seems like a good guy, I've never been a fan of the Ponder pick from the start. I think we can all agree, that even at the time, the Ponder selection at #12 overall in 2011 was a big reach and a panic move by the Vikings, who were surprised when all of the top QBs of that draft (at the time) were off the board by their pick. They were determined to come away from that draft with Favre's replacement while McNabb filled in for a few games.

After about a season and half worth of starts, Ponder hasn't shown much improvement. He showed some flashes early in 2012, but then regressed with several terrible performances at QB before showing up to play decent game manager style football for the final 4 games of the regular season last year. Unfortunately, we didn't get to see him play in the playoffs game vs the Packers due to injury. He looked bad this preseason, and looked terrible against Detroit aside from a couple of runs from him and being bailed out by Simpson and Jennings on some tough catches.

Anyone remember how hard a lot of people were on Tarvaris Jackson back in the Chile days? Jackson started 1 season finale game vs the Packers a rookie, then 1 season as a stater, followed by 2 bad losses in his 3rd year before they benched him for the Gus Bus. Then after a dissapointing one and done home playoff loss to Philly under TJax, they traded for Rosefals and brought in Brett Favre on a rescue mission. TJax didn't see the field again until Favre got destroyed in 2010, and surprise surprise, TJax, while a seemily hard working guy, still sucked.

I had to say it, but this whole Ponder situation feels like TJax 2.0 to me. Even after showing very little after a decent amount of starts and still being pretty bad, there's a handful of people not ready to give up on the guy, insisting that he needs more time. I have to ask though, how much time did guys like Andrew Luck and RG3 have? Yet they are still miles above anything Ponder has ever done. I say give him 1 more start. If he doesn't play at least semi decently, it's time to sit him and give someone else a shot before it gets too late in the season. He needs to start playing at least sort of like the 12 overall pick he was selected as to warrent them continuing to start him. That said, I know they almost definitely won't bench him until the season is already pretty much over.

 

[NCChiFan]

Please, at least one more week ? Won't mind it a bit if the coaches allow him to throw the ball 50+ times, just don't run us to death with AP.

 

[JohnRandle]

LOL...Ponder will be there next week, but that could be the last...You never know.

 

[NorthernLights88]

LOL...Ponder will be there next week, but that could be the last...You never know.

I'm well aware that Ponder will be starting week 2. Maybe you missed the part where I said I highly doubt they'd pull the plug even if he has a horrendous showing in Chicago.

 

[LPinSLC]

Pretty sure he was responding to the Bears fan.

 

[NorthernLights88]

Pretty sure he was responding to the Bears fan.

This is what the quoting feature is meant for. It isn't always easy to discern exactly what someone who you don't know means on a message board when they don't make it clear who they are talking to. I generally quote to make myself clear unless I'm responding to the OP, but that's just me.

As far as the Bears fan goes... Of course you'd want Ponder starting at QB for the Vikes, especially if he keeps stinking up the joint, haha. Also, you must not have caught much of the Vikings/Lions game if you feel that Ponder wasn't given enough chances to throw the ball and they just kept running Peterson into the ground. I don't think Peterson even had 20 carries that game, what was he, like 15 yards on 17 carries after the big 78 yarder? That's not driving him into the ground. Part of why Detroit was able to keep such a lid on AP was for the same reason teams have always done it - the Vikings passing game just can't get it done, and AP is by far their biggest threat with their terrible QB play, so teams stack 8-9 in the box all game long daring Ponder to beat them with his arm, but he just can't do it.

The one thing that still blows my mind, and I feel is not Ponder's fault, but 100% on Musgrave is, why aren't they throwing it to Kyle Rudolph more often? A great receiving TE can make a QB's life a lot easier. Rudolph should be at least a 2nd read option on a lot more plays to give Ponder a shot to dump it off if he can't get it to his primary.

 

[NCChiFan]

Of course you'd want Ponder starting at QB for the Vikes, especially if he keeps stinking up the joint, haha. Also, you must not have caught much of the Vikings/Lions game if you feel that Ponder wasn't given enough chances to throw the ball and they just kept running Peterson into the ground. I don't think Peterson even had 20 carries that game, what was he, like 15 yards on 17 carries after the big 78 yarder? That's not driving him into the ground.

You're correct, I didn't watch the Minny v. Detroit game. To bad Peterson didn't have more touches, I hope that trend continues Sunday. My fear is your coaches figure out they have to give the ball to AP 30 + times and that my Bears revert back to our tackling techniques from last weeks game vs. Cincy or the lack there of.

 

[JohnRandle]

This is what the quoting feature is meant for. It isn't always easy to discern exactly what someone who you don't know means on a message board when they don't make it clear who they are talking to. I generally quote to make myself clear unless I'm responding to the OP, but that's just me.

As far as the Bears fan goes... Of course you'd want Ponder starting at QB for the Vikes, especially if he keeps stinking up the joint, haha. Also, you must not have caught much of the Vikings/Lions game if you feel that Ponder wasn't given enough chances to throw the ball and they just kept running Peterson into the ground. I don't think Peterson even had 20 carries that game, what was he, like 15 yards on 17 carries after the big 78 yarder? That's not driving him into the ground. Part of why Detroit was able to keep such a lid on AP was for the same reason teams have always done it - the Vikings passing game just can't get it done, and AP is by far their biggest threat with their terrible QB play, so teams stack 8-9 in the box all game long daring Ponder to beat them with his arm, but he just can't do it.

The one thing that still blows my mind, and I feel is not Ponder's fault, but 100% on Musgrave is, why aren't they throwing it to Kyle Rudolph more often? A great receiving TE can make a QB's life a lot easier. Rudolph should be at least a 2nd read option on a lot more plays to give Ponder a shot to dump it off if he can't get it to his primary.

If I were responding to your post, I would have quoted it. But since I was responding to a post right above mine, there's no need(other than for the folks who can't quite get that)to use the quote function.

Thanks for the heads up though, I'll keep it in mind for the next time.

 

[NorthernLights88]

If I were responding to your post, I would have quoted it. But since I was responding to a post right above mine, there's no need(other than for the folks who can't quite get that)to use the quote function.

Thanks for the heads up though, I'll keep it in mind for the next time.

I'm not really sure why you feel the need to imply that I'm stupid for "not getting that" you were responding to the guy above you. In hindsight, I can understand that you probably were before you confirmed it, I'm just used to people generally either quoting or somehow referring to another poster(s) unless they are responding to the OP. I guess that's not how people do it here.

I didn't say anything implying that you're an idiot or anything for not doing the quote thing, just explained my perspective. It's really not that big of a deal, like I said, I was explaining why I responded to the post the way I did, that's all. Whatever though, it's all good.

 

[JohnRandle]

This is what the quoting feature is meant for. It isn't always easy to discern exactly what someone who you don't know means on a message board when they don't make it clear who they are talking to. I generally quote to make myself clear unless I'm responding to the OP, but that's just me.
As far as the Bears fan goes... Of course you'd want Ponder starting at QB for the Vikes, especially if he keeps stinking up the joint, haha. Also, you must not have caught much of the Vikings/Lions game if you feel that Ponder wasn't given enough chances to throw the ball and they just kept running Peterson into the ground. I don't think Peterson even had 20 carries that game, what was he, like 15 yards on 17 carries after the big 78 yarder? That's not driving him into the ground. Part of why Detroit was able to keep such a lid on AP was for the same reason teams have always done it - the Vikings passing game just can't get it done, and AP is by far their biggest threat with their terrible QB play, so teams stack 8-9 in the box all game long daring Ponder to beat them with his arm, but he just can't do it.

The one thing that still blows my mind, and I feel is not Ponder's fault, but 100% on Musgrave is, why aren't they throwing it to Kyle Rudolph more often? A great receiving TE can make a QB's life a lot easier. Rudolph should be at least a 2nd read option on a lot more plays to give Ponder a shot to dump it off if he can't get it to his primary.

What's the difference between the sentence you posted here, or the one I had in parenthesis?

I'm not really sure why you feel the need to imply that I'm stupid for "not getting that" you were responding to the guy above you. In hindsight, I can understand that you probably were before you confirmed it, I'm just used to people generally either quoting or somehow referring to another poster(s) unless they are responding to the OP. I guess that's not how people do it here.

I didn't say anything implying that you're an idiot or anything for not doing the quote thing, just explained my perspective. It's really not that big of a deal, like I said, I was explaining why I responded to the post the way I did, that's all. Whatever though, it's all good.

The boards I came from never had a quote or reply function, albeit it's been a couple years, old habits are hard to break. We had to either copy/paste the op's message, or respond to them by name. So if I don't quote someone, it generally means I'm responding to the last post. Now if we were so busy in here that there were 5 posts every 30 seconds, I would have to use the quote function without a doubt.