The State of the Vikings

[Mothman]

I'm starting this thread because 808vikingsfan explicitly asked that the "Positive " thread he started be kept positive and I find myself battling my urge to respond in that thread because what I have to say about the team right now isn't very positive.

I want to keep it positive, I really do, but I'm just not feeling it. I'm having a very hard time buying into the "glass half full" perspective right now. It's easy to pin Thursday's debacle on Ponder and to point to Sunday's offensive explosion as evidence that Bridgewater is going to save this team. I sincerely hope he's the catalyst for an immense amount of future success for the Vikings. However, I have no illusions that 40 point, 500+ yard games are about to become typical for this Vikings offense as soon as Teddy gets back on the field. That was a glorious win but Atlanta is now 1-9 on the road going back to the start of last season. As we saw first-hand, they're a poor road team. That doesn't mean the Vikings performance against them wasn't encouraging, because it was and I hope, as Joe Kapp 11 wrote in the Positive thread, it was a glimpse of the Vikings future.

Joe also wrote in that thread that he's bullish on Zimmer and Turner. I'm bullish on the former, not so much on the latter. He had a marvelous game plan for a first-time starter against Atlanta and it worked like a charm. He also has an incredible resume as an offensive coach in the NFL and I understand that he's lost two weapons he thought he'd have in Peterson and Rudolph. The loss of Peterson, in particular, hurts big time. However, other than the Atlanta game, I'm unimpressed with what Norv is doing. The Vikes have scored 10 or fewer points in 3 of their 5 games now. Maybe it will click again once Bridgewater comes back but I get the feeling Norv isn't quite sure what to do with the pieces he has yet and I hope he can figure it out.

I don't mean to sound too hard on Norv because, as I said last year, I think the Vikes have talent/personnel issues. It should be apparent at this point that a coaching change wasn't the miracle "cure" some thought it would be, though I do think Zimmer may be the right man for the job.

My biggest concern at this point is that the Vikings not only have talent issues but also have deep-seated character issues, and I'm not just referring to the endless stream of off-the-field arrests and controversies. A lot of people seem willing to blame the latest debacle at Green Bay on Ponder. I won't do that,even though he played terribly. The whole team played sloppy, undisciplined football almost from the start of that game. We've been hearing for a while now that defenders are doing too much freelancing. Zimmer sounds frustrated and that's understandable because his message doesn't seem to be getting through and I blame that on the players, not the coach. Robison said the mood on the sideline was "almost like some people had checked out". The Vikes rolled over and played dead against their biggest rival—again— and that's just unacceptable. Three double-digit losses in 5 games is also unacceptable.

I want to be positive but I'm increasingly of the belief that some house-cleaning needs to be done. I'm not even sure which players need to go but I hope Zimmer and company can identify who is "right" for the successful team they want to build and at this point, regardless of their contracts or status, I'm okay with the Vikes jettisoning any player who doesn't fit that description. I'm getting the impression there's too much selfish play going on, too little leadership and perhaps even a lack of heart with this team.

I think the bumpy ride is going to continue for a while.

[Texas Vike]

I'm starting this thread because 808vikingsfan explicitly asked that the "Positive " thread he started be kept positive and I find myself battling my urge to respond in that thread because what I have to say about the team right now isn't very positive.

I want to keep it positive, I really do, but I'm just not feeling it. I'm having a very hard time buying into the "glass half full" perspective right now. It's easy to pin Thursday's debacle on Ponder and to point to Sunday's offensive explosion as evidence that Bridgewater is going to save this team. I sincerely hope he's the catalyst for an immense amount of future success for the Vikings. However, I have no illusions that 40 point, 500+ yard games are about to become typical for this Vikings offense as soon as Teddy gets back on the field. That was a glorious win but Atlanta is now 1-9 on the road going back to the start of last season. As we saw first-hand, they're a poor road team. That doesn't mean the Vikings performance against them wasn't encouraging, because it was and I hope, as Joe Kapp 11 wrote in the Positive thread, it was a glimpse of the Vikings future.

Joe also wrote in that thread that he's bullish on Zimmer and Turner. I'm bullish on the former, not so much on the latter. He had a marvelous game plan for a first-time starter against Atlanta and it worked like a charm. He also has an incredible resume as an offensive coach in the NFL and I understand that he's lost two weapons he thought he'd have in Peterson and Rudolph. The loss of Peterson, in particular, hurts big time. However, other than the Atlanta game, I'm unimpressed with what Norv is doing. The Vikes have scored 10 or fewer points in 3 of their 5 games now. Maybe it will click again once Bridgewater comes back but I get the feeling Norv isn't quite sure what to do with the pieces he has yet and I hope he can figure it out.

I don't mean to sound too hard on Norv because, as I said last year, I think the Vikes have talent/personnel issues. It should be apparent at this point that a coaching change wasn't the miracle "cure" some thought it would be, though I do think Zimmer may be the right man for the job.

My biggest concern at this point is that the Vikings not only have talent issues but also have deep-seated character issues, and I'm not just referring to the endless stream of off-the-field arrests and controversies. A lot of people seem willing to blame the latest debacle at Green Bay on Ponder. I won't do that,even though he played terribly. The whole team played sloppy, undisciplined football almost from the start of that game. We've been hearing for a while now that defenders are doing too much freelancing. Zimmer sounds frustrated and that's understandable because his message doesn't seem to be getting through and I blame that on the players, not the coach. Robison said the mood on the sideline was "almost like some people had checked out". The Vikes rolled over and played dead against their biggest rival—again— and that's just unacceptable. Three double-digit losses in 5 games is also unacceptable.

I want to be positive but I'm increasingly of the belief that some house-cleaning needs to be done. I'm not even sure which players need to go but I hope Zimmer and company can identify who is "right" for the successful team they want to build and at this point, regardless of their contracts or status, I'm okay with the Vikes jettisoning any player who doesn't fit that description. I'm getting the impression there's too much selfish play going on, too little leadership and perhaps even a lack of heart with this team.

I think the bumpy ride is going to continue for a while.

Solid post, Jim. I agree on the central part of your thread: that the defense has a lack of heart and leadership right now. I feel much better about Zimmer than I did with Frazier, however. I think he will figure it out and will make the changes that are necessary. I think the biggest disappointment has been on the D-line.

Ponder is surely not the only problem with this team. However, seeing TB juxtaposed to CP displayed how they are opposites in almost every way. The two couldn't be more different: one is calm and smart in the pocket, seems to see the field well, reacts to pressure well, is accurate on short to mid level throws, and doesn't get rattled easily. The other is well short of the NFL baseline in all of those. Anytime you get to the third string QB, you're likely in trouble, though. We've faced a lot of adversity in the first quarter of the season. I expect things to get better.

[HardcoreVikesFan]

You are not alone Jim. I myself have been finding it increasing hard to be positive about this team this year. However, as I alluded to in another thread, I have to realize that this team is rebuilding. There are going to be bumps along the way.

That being said, my biggest issues with the team are currently the play of our defensive line, the play of our offensive line, and the lack of touches for Cordarrelle Patterson.

Defensively, we yet to allow a 300 yard passer, but we have lost three games by double digit points. A big reason why is because our pass rush has been nonexistent. Brian Robison looks old and slow. Sharrif just disappears. Everson Griffen has a great burst, but he I noticed he is trying to go outside more than trying to work inside. Against the run, our line gets washed and doesn't like to maintain their gaps. We are close to allowing almost 100 yards rushing a game. Something has to change. This defensive line looks worse than last year, and that isn't a good thing.

Offensively on the line, we have problems. I have never been a huge fan of our offensive line. I have always thought we have had an over-rated offensive line. My assumptions seem to be more than just a hypothesis this year. Sullivan is looking like he did when he was a starter in the Favre era. Loadholt looks sluggish as ever pass protecting. Charlie Johnson is, well, Charlie. The biggest disappointment is Matt Kalil. I don't what the hell is wrong with him, but he looks as bad a Charlie Johnson did when he was the left tackle. He isn't setting his feet well in pass sets and he looks like he is trying to lunge instead of punching. I don't know if he can get his issues solved in a week or two, but if I am Jeff Davidson, I am doing everything in my power to get Kalil back on his game.

Finally, as it pertains to Cordarrelle Patterson, I only have one abbreviated phrase to ask the coaching staff: wtf? How is it that even this coaching staff cannot find a way to get Cordarrelle Patterson the ball? I would understand if this was Bill Musgrave running the show, but Norv Turner? At least give him a freaking hand off or two. I know CP isn't the most polished receiver yet, but my god, there has to be a way to get him the ball. Patterson is our only legitimate home run threat on offense. If we cannot find a way to get Cordarrelle more involved, we are screwed.

At the end of the day, this team is what it is: a young, rebuilding team that will give an inconsistent effort all season long. Teams like this don't make the playoffs. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, as long as this team shows improvement - at least in my opinion. However, if we fail to miss the playoffs and this team never seems to show any improvement we are in trouble. I have faith in this coaching staff still, but our current issues are not to be overlooked.

[Mothman]

Thanks for the excellent replies, guys. TexasVike, the Vikings have definitely faced a lot of adversity thus far. I wish they'd handled it better.

HardcoreVikesFan, the issues you listed are among those that concern me most too. I'm glad you mentioned the run defense because I agree that something has to change. Zimmer sounds pretty frustrated with it too. I hope it's something he can get corrected with the players he has on the roster.

Like you, I think the o-ine has been overrated for years. They're an unreliable bunch and I'm concerned about how they'll hold up against the Lions formidable front next week. Hopefully, Bridgewater will be able to get the ball out of his hands quickly again. I could be wrong but I doubt he's going to get another 200 yard effort from the running backs in that game to relieve pressure.

As you said, this is a young, rebuilding team. I'm hoping we'll see improvement and more consistency before the end of the season but I'm starting to believe, more and more, that this team has leadership and character issues on it's roster. If so, that's going to make Zimmer's task harder.

[losperros]

If the Vikings weren't only five games into the season with a new coaching staff, a new system on both sides of the ball, many new players, and what I consider to be some key injuries, I would feel much more negative about things. But considering the Vikings have won two games and there are some young players that look to be future stars, I guess I'm fine with this newest version of the Vikings taking time to gel.

I realize the D isn't always looking their best. However, I agree with Jim that there are still some talent gaps there. I figure that means another draft/free agency period is needed to address the needs. There's nothing that can be done about that now, aside from some judicious scouting (which the Vikings are probably doing). So I'm not going to get in a big funk about it.

Also, I'm excited about Xavier Rhodes having two impressive games in a row. He's settling down, which unfortunately I can't say about some of the other DBs. So that one kind of balances out into being both positive and negative.

Speaking of being excited, I'm really looking forward to witnessing Bridgewater's learning curve as he gets experience. For me that's a positive.

OTOH, I fully agree with Jim about Norv Turner. Turner has a darn good track record as an offensive coordinator. We all know that. And he can certainly make adjustments. But as I said in another thread, what the heck is he waiting for? This is especially true about Cordarrelle Patterson. Turner is paid good money to find and then put to work the best playmakers the offense has. Patterson is one of them, maybe the most explosive weapon the Vikings currently have. I consider Turner's inability or unwillingness (whichever it might be) to involve Patterson more often in the offense to be a setback for the team.

[Leafman]

If the Vikings weren't only five games into the season with a new coaching staff, a new system on both sides of the ball, many new players, and what I consider to be some key injuries, I would feel much more negative about things. But considering the Vikings have won two games and there are some young players that look to be future stars, I guess I'm fine with this newest version of the Vikings taking time to gel.

Exactly right, and there isn't a team in the league that doesn't have issues and plenty of things to criticize right now. The three teams where all is sunny and rosy right now are Cincinnati, San Diego and Arizona, and watching their games I can find plenty to criticize and lots of inconsistency. Meanwhile in New England, New Orleans, Washington and Pittsburgh, the sky is falling.

The Vikings have holes, areas in desperate need of improvement, and big problems with consistency. These are all issues I'd expect to encounter with the key personnel losses, the new system and coaches, and the transition in culture. Bud Grant used to say "it's not who you play, it's when you play them". Which is another way of saying the talent level in the NFL is high enough that anyone can make you look bad if you don't bring your A game every week, and that was before the current level of league parity.

They won 2 games in impressive fashion, but there was a lot to criticize in both wins. They lost two games that were actually a lot closer than the score indicated, and there were plenty of positives to note in both losses. The Green Bay loss was the most complete team failure, which I believe was primarily a function of the team struggling with Ponder as its leader, but even then there were positives ... namely the 3rd down defense, shutting down Rodgers on 6 of his first 8 drives, the play of Xavier Rhodes, and the play of Jarius Wright. The Packers are also on absolute fire right now, so we ran into a buzzsaw, it was a perfect storm.

The criticism of Turner and his use of Patterson is unwarranted, IMO. If I'm coordinator, and I used him to great effect in the first game, then saw my second and third opponents make adjustments to spy him after seeing how I was using him in game 1, I wouldn't go back to those plays again either UNTIL I felt he was becoming a more complete receiver. I'd focus on getting him more game reps running traditional receiver routes so he could develop those much-needed abilities and until he falls off opposing defensive coordinators' radars a bit. Sweeps and flys *never* work against NFL defenses when they are expecting them, and that's the price for using them several times in the first two weeks.

I always say it here, and I'll say it again ... the play in the trenches ultimately determines success in the NFL, and that's where the Vikings need the most work. Improving consistency on the OLine, and shoring up the first level run defense are priorities. For the latter, I think both Zimmer and Robison have pointed out what needs to be improved ... they gotta stop playing as individuals trying to make big plays and instead focus on their individual assignments within a team defensive scheme. They don't have enough talent yet to be a big play defense with individuals following instinct instead of sticking to their assignments.

LEAFMAN THE PURPLE FAN

[vikesfan87]

My expectations were sufficiently low enough going into the season that I'm not panicking over anything that has occurred in the Vikings season. I knew that Bridgewater was going to likely sit for a season while Cassel acted as a stop-gap for the season. I knew that Adrian Peterson could give a chance for the Vikings to stay competitive to compensate for what I consider is not a great receiving corps. I knew that the defense had some talent in specific positions, but lacked depth in others. But, there have been several new question marks that have opened up such as probably needing to replace Peterson at RB as well as Matt Kalil's regression. This is going to take a few years whether we like it or not and right now we fans just have to roll with the punches.

[saint33]

I am not as down on this team as you are. Not by a long shot. You seem to be suggesting (maybe not?) thursday night's game was more indicative of how we're going to play the rest of the year than last week's game. I don't think we'll play as well as we did against Atlanta every week, but I think it's more indicative of what to expect out of the offense with Bridgewater in the game. That's not to say we'll put up 500+ yards every game, but the offense as a whole will move more consistently and we will put points on the board.

I know how you feel about blaming the entire game on one player, QB or not. I'm with you on that to some extent, Ponder was far from the only bad player on Thursday. However, he was the worst. And when a team's QB is the worst player on the field, that tends to carry over to other parts of the team. I think when you get that kind of play out of a QB, it'd be valiant of the team to step up in a big way to make up for him, but the fact is we are not that talented, or maybe mature is a better word, of a team. If Peterson were still out there, I could see it, then we have something to rally around. However, I do believe that after a rough start, the defense made a valiant effort to step up and carry the team. Yes the Packers scored TDs in 2 of their first 3 drives, but they also had four 3 and outs in their first 6 drives. Until Ponder gave the ball to the defense on back to back plays, which was the point which the defense just broke.

I still believe that you're off base on the talent level of this team, and I don't agree that coaching hasn't made a huge difference. Before we get so doom and gloom here about our supposed lack of talent, let's still remember that we're one home victory away from coming out of the toughest portion of our schedule 3-3. Honestly, I think by the end of this season, you may be singing a different tune about the impact the coaching staff has had. Although I am with you on the criticism of Norv's play calling. I don't think he's utilizing his talent to it's best ability, although I do believe he's been dealt a bum hand considering the constant alterations he's had to make thanks to injury and Peterson's situation.

As far the oline, running game and WRs go, I could argue with you to death about how things will change with Teddy. How his presence in the pocket is exceptional vs. non-existent from Ponder. How well he reads defenses and gets the ball out on time to the right place, something Ponder simply has yet to grasp. How his leadership and poise boosts the confidence of those around him. These are things I've said about Teddy since before the draft, why I was willing to move up from #8 and draft him if need be. He showed them in college, he showed them in the preseason, and he showed them in his first start. But ultimately, it's just a wait and see type of thing

[PurpleMustReign]

The Vikings haven't lost just AD and Rudolph, they have lost Fusco, Cassel (their starting QB), and he has had to use 3 starting QBs in the first 5 weeks, something that has been done only 4 times since 2000 (if I am remembering the stat correctly...). He also lost his #3 WR when Simpson got released. I would say Turner has done about as well as he could. My only "complaint" is that he doesn't get the ball to Patterson as much as I would like.

My biggest concern on this team is the OL as we just signed many of them to long contracts despite never really proving their worth. I still don't understand why Davidson was retained as the coach, his lines have horribly underperformed for years. The talent is there, but he needs to figure out how to get more out of top draft picks, not just low round projects.

[Mothman]

The criticism of Turner and his use of Patterson is unwarranted, IMO. If I'm coordinator, and I used him to great effect in the first game, then saw my second and third opponents make adjustments to spy him after seeing how I was using him in game 1, I wouldn't go back to those plays again either UNTIL I felt he was becoming a more complete receiver. I'd focus on getting him more game reps running traditional receiver routes so he could develop those much-needed abilities and until he falls off opposing defensive coordinators' radars a bit. Sweeps and flys *never* work against NFL defenses when they are expecting them, and that's the price for using them several times in the first two weeks.

Sweeps and flys are hardly their only options. They can throw screens to him. He can run slants and crossing routes. He's shown that he know show to use his body to shield the defender from the ball. I refuse to believe that he can't be more productive than the minimal level of productivity we've seen the last two weeks. When a guy is that talented, the coordinator has to find ways to get the ball in his hands and there are ways to do that.

I always say it here, and I'll say it again ... the play in the trenches ultimately determines success in the NFL, and that's where the Vikings need the most work. Improving consistency on the OLine, and shoring up the first level run defense are priorities. For the latter, I think both Zimmer and Robison have pointed out what needs to be improved ... they gotta stop playing as individuals trying to make big plays and instead focus on their individual assignments within a team defensive scheme. They don't have enough talent yet to be a big play defense with individuals following instinct instead of sticking to their assignments.

I agree and I also agree that games are primarily won and lost at the line of scrimmage, which is why I can't really buy what you said earlier about the GB loss being a team failure that was "primarily a function of the team struggling with Ponder as its leader". I buy the first part: it was a team failure. I don't buy the second, especially because I don't think Ponder was their leader. He's the third string QB at this point. His teammates needed to bring their A game to help pick his game up, not rely on him to lift their level of play with a degree of fire and leadership he has rarely, if ever, shown before.

[fiestavike]

I think one thing that needs to be pointed out is that a lot of elite QBs have terrible offensive lines. Teams like GB and NE have had great success with terrible offensive lines for the last few years. With the propensity of the quick passing game, premier pass protectors are less valuable than they used to be and that money can be better spent to keep a premier QB.

I think this illustrates that a great QB and a quick passing game can overcome a poor offensive line, especially given that QBs aren't allowed to be beaten on like they used to be. Even in the 90s if a team tried to run that kind of offense, defenders would use their allowed extra step after the ball was released to abuse the QB and force teams to keep guys in to protect. Its just not the case anymore.

This relates to the Vikings in that Bridgewater has shown himself capable of making quick and good decisions and against the blitz and able to make plays with his feet. Its not surprising how much better the team looked against ATL with Bridgewater than against GB with Ponder. Teddy allowed them to scheme in such a way as to minimize the impact of poor Oline play and Ponder did not.

Against GB, with their poor run defense, that really hurt. I'm not sure the game plan they used against ATL is going to work against DET with their DT duo so it'll be interesting to see what they try to do.

edit* one possibility is giving McKinnon the bigger role and running a lot of stretch/bootleg rather than testing the middle of that DET defense.

[Mothman]

I am not as down on this team as you are. Not by a long shot. You seem to be suggesting (maybe not?) thursday night's game was more indicative of how we're going to play the rest of the year than last week's game.

I assume you're addressing me so I'll clarify: I was definitely not trying to suggest that Thursday's game was more indicative of how the Vikes will play the rest of the year than the Atlanta game. Frankly, I doubt either game is indicative of how they'll play, although together, they might be. I'm with those who think we're going to see a lot of "up and down" from the Vikes this season and I understand why. They're a team in transition and on top of that, they unexpectedly lost their best player.

I know how you feel about blaming the entire game on one player, QB or not. I'm with you on that to some extent, Ponder was far from the only bad player on Thursday. However, he was the worst. And when a team's QB is the worst player on the field, that tends to carry over to other parts of the team. I think when you get that kind of play out of a QB, it'd be valiant of the team to step up in a big way to make up for him, but the fact is we are not that talented, or maybe mature is a better word, of a team. If Peterson were still out there, I could see it, then we have something to rally around. However, I do believe that after a rough start, the defense made a valiant effort to step up and carry the team.

They did but their rough start put Ponder in the worst possible position. I'm not making excuses for him but putting him in a 14-0 hole, on the road, was brutal, as was his pass protection right from the start. Ponder was brutal too but if he was "the worst player on the field" and they needed something to rally around, they could have rallied around each other. Isn't that what being a team is all about? If you ask me, Ponder's teammates let him down on Thursday every bit as much as he let them down.

I still believe that you're off base on the talent level of this team, and I don't agree that coaching hasn't made a huge difference. Before we get so doom and gloom here about our supposed lack of talent, let's still remember that we're one home victory away from coming out of the toughest portion of our schedule 3-3.

I'm not trying to be "doom and gloom" about it, I'm just trying to call it like I see it. I don't think this team is any more talented than the majority of teams in the NFL, although I think they are distinctly less talented than a few. However, it's not just the talent level that concerns me, it's the nature of that talent. I don't like hearing week after week that they aren't playing the defense the way they're being asked to play it. I don't like hearing Robison question their effort or seeing them give such a weak effort against the Packers. As for the coaching: I see a difference but a huge difference? If there's a huge difference, it's certainly not visible in the results of these games. I'm not saying that to be critical of the coaching staff because I didn't expect a huge difference right away but there were plenty who felt coaching was the main issue with this team.

Honestly, I think by the end of this season, you may be singing a different tune about the impact the coaching staff has had.

I hope I am but it's not like I'm really down on them now.I just think it's obvious they aren't the "miracle cure" some fans were expecting.

As far the oline, running game and WRs go, I could argue with you to death about how things will change with Teddy. How his presence in the pocket is exceptional vs. non-existent from Ponder. How well he reads defenses and gets the ball out on time to the right place, something Ponder simply has yet to grasp. How his leadership and poise boosts the confidence of those around him. These are things I've said about Teddy since before the draft, why I was willing to move up from #8 and draft him if need be. He showed them in college, he showed them in the preseason, and he showed them in his first start. But ultimately, it's just a wait and see type of thing

Yes, it is... I think he'll make a difference, perhaps a big one. My main concern with him now is his ability to stay healthy. it's more than an a little discouraging to see him injured and missing time after just one game.

[saint33]

I agree and I also agree that games are primarily won and lost at the line of scrimmage, which is why I can't really buy what you said earlier about the GB loss being a team failure that was "primarily a function of the team struggling with Ponder as its leader". I buy the first part: it was a team failure. I don't buy the second, especially because I don't think Ponder was their leader. He's the third string QB at this point. His teammates needed to bring their A game to help pick his game up, not rely on him to lift their level of play with a degree of fire and leadership he has rarely, if ever, shown before.

I don't think anyone is suggesting Ponder needed to lift the play of those around him and be a leader on Thursday. If that's what anyone expected, well I don't know what planet they're living on. Expecting Ponder to maybe keep a few drives alive, get the ball past the 50 yard line, score a few points, or god forbid just keep the ball out of the defense's hands would have been nice. Basically just be somewhat competent. That's something he was unable to do in every facet of his job. I'm not exaggerating, that performance was one of the worst I've seen from a QB in a long time, maybe even worse than Josh Freeman's a year ago.

[Mothman]

I think one thing that needs to be pointed out is that a lot of elite QBs have terrible offensive lines. Teams like GB and NE have had great success with terrible offensive lines for the last few years. With the propensity of the quick passing game, premier pass protectors are less valuable than they used to be and that money can be better spent to keep a premier QB.

I think this illustrates that a great QB and a quick passing game can overcome a poor offensive line, especially given that QBs aren't allowed to be beaten on like they used to be. Even in the 90s if a team tried to run that kind of offense, defenders would use their allowed extra step after the ball was released to abuse the QB and force teams to keep guys in to protect. Its just not the case anymore.

This relates to the Vikings in that Bridgewater has shown himself capable of making quick and good decisions and against the blitz and able to make plays with his feet. Its not surprising how much better the team looked against ATL with Bridgewater than against GB with Ponder. Teddy allowed them to scheme in such a way as to minimize the impact of poor Oline play and Ponder did not.

I agree with you to a point but there's more to it than that and I'm curious to see what happens going forward. I don't think it's as simple as Bridgewater's presence allowing them to scheme in such a way as to minimize the impact of poor Oline play, and for two reasons: in that Atlanta game, they had an excellent o-line play and I don't believe it was simply due to Bridgewater's presence. I'm sure some will disagree but i don't think Atlanta perceived him as such a threat in the passing game that Bridgewater's presence alone allowed the Vikes to rush for 200+ yards. The OL delivered in that game.

More importantly, I think, to some extent, it was the Falcons who enabled the Vikes to scheme as you described. They let Bridgewater throw a lot of quick-hitters and it's easy for a QB to get the ball out of his hands on routes like that. I fully expect upcoming opponents to try to take away the short stuff and challenge Bridgewater to beat them down the field. If he can do it, then we'll really have something!

[Mothman]

I don't think anyone is suggesting Ponder needed to lift the play of those around him and be a leader on Thursday. If that's what anyone expected, well I don't know what planet they're living on. Expecting Ponder to maybe keep a few drives alive, get the ball past the 50 yard line, score a few points, or god forbid just keep the ball out of the defense's hands would have been nice. Basically just be somewhat competent. That's something he was unable to do in every facet of his job. I'm not exaggerating, that performance was one of the worst I've seen from a QB in a long time, maybe even worse than Josh Freeman's a year ago.

I'm tired of talking about it. I'm past caring how bad Ponder is...he's toast anyway. What concerns me is how little the rest of the team helped him out.