If healthy, who should start from here on out?

[Webbfann]

Hahaha. Many of us said if you put in even an average QB the whole team will look better. So we put in Cassell and the whole team looks better. Suddenly we have wide receivers making 70 yd TDs. Suddenly even our interceptions and fumbles for turnovers become near-intercepts and first downs. Suddenly our Oline looks better. Suddenly we have downfield passing threats and holes open up for AP. Suddenly, OMG!!!! The D digs deep and comes up with a big play when it matters.

But this has nothing to do with the QB change. This has nothing to do with the fact that Cassell releases the ball quicker, making the Oline look better, and negating the need for them to hold ground for longer while Ponder waits for his receiver to have a 5 yd cushion. It has nothing to do with Cassell making passes that enable the receivers to run with it. It has nothing to do with the fact that receivers are actually close enough to the ball to prevent interceptions. AP having holes is all because of Felton, and has nothing to do with Cassell being a pass threat. And the defense coming up big has nothing to do with them knowing they could never face the offense if they blew the 17 pt lead that Cassell gave them.

No no, the whole team was just better and Cassell playing better than Ponder ever has was a non-factor. It has nothing to do with the fact the team knew they had an NFL caliber QB playing for them.

[Funkytown]

Hahaha. Many of us said if you put in even an average QB the whole team will look better. So we put in Cassell and the whole team looks better. Suddenly we have wide receivers making 70 yd TDs. Suddenly even our interceptions and fumbles for turnovers become near-intercepts and first downs. Suddenly our Oline looks better. Suddenly we have downfield passing threats and holes open up for AP. Suddenly, OMG!!!! The D digs deep and comes up with a big play when it matters.

But this has nothing to do with the QB change. This has nothing to do with the fact that Cassell releases the ball quicker, making the Oline look better, and negating the need for them to hold ground for longer while Ponder waits for his receiver to have a 5 yd cushion. It has nothing to do with Cassell making passes that enable the receivers to run with it. It has nothing to do with the fact that receivers are actually close enough to the ball to prevent interceptions. AP having holes is all because of Felton, and has nothing to do with Cassell being a pass threat. And the defense coming up big has nothing to do with them knowing they could never face the offense if they blew the 17 pt lead that Cassell gave them.

No no, the whole team was just better and Cassell playing better than Ponder ever has was a non-factor. It has nothing to do with the fact the team knew they had an NFL caliber QB playing for them.

Truth.

[vikeinmontana]

AD's take...

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/adrian-pet ... 00855.html

[Just Me]

AD's take...

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/adrian-pet ... 00855.html

Nice article - Thanks for posting it....

[Funkytown]

AD's take...

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/adrian-pet ... 00855.html

And Cassel seems like a genuinely nice guy. He's always saying the right things and has the perfect attitude of a true team player. Man, he's nice and the most capable of leading us to victory? Start the man. Please.

[mondry]

My biggest fear right now is that we'll play Ponder again, lose another game or two to go 1-4 1-5, put cassel back in and finish 8-8. Miss the playoffs AND have a middle of the road crappy draft pick. The worst of both worlds.

[Mothman]

I'm really surprised that comparisons to Ponder bother you so much, especially given the thread's title and intent. This thread is MEANT to talk about the various differences between Ponder and Cassel.

I understand what the thread is about. I understand why the two QBs are being compared. None of this obvious information is lost on me.

Let's move on before I blow a $#&$@* gasket.

[mondry]

And Cassel seems like a genuinely nice guy. He's always saying the right things and has the perfect attitude of a true team player. Man, he's nice and the most capable of leading us to victory? Start the man. Please.

Yeah, and I'm a bit inclined to think those bad years in KC were more about him being in a toxic situation. His coaches were romeo creniel(sp) and todd haley. It's very similar to how bad Mike Singeltary was in SF. A team with a ton of talent vastly underperforming and like SF oh look, the chiefs are getting some good coaching from Andy Reid and they're 4-0 and look pretty dominant. Mean while, Todd Haley's steelers are 0-4 right now, that guy's just poison.

Up here with the best run game, decent receivers (he's only ever really had Bowe with the chiefs) and a better O-line (the chiefs had one of the worst) I actually think Cassel can have a solid year. We've said for a long while now if this team only have average QB play it'd be better, well average QB play is staring us in the face haha. Once he warmed up I think he completed his last 11 passes or so in a row and he's only going to get better spending more times with the #1's and getting more reps in practice.

[Just Me]

I understand what the thread is about. I understand why the two QBs are being compared. None of this obvious information is lost on me.

Let's move on before I blow a $#&$@* gasket.

Jim,

If you're so inclined would you care to elaborate? (I'm not trying to 'stir the pot' here, I'm just trying to see where you're coming from.) I always like reading your thoughtful and insightful posts, and while I may not always agree with you, I always am able to understand where you are coming from on a given point. I think you present (or at least try to) thoughts in an objective manner and you frequently cause me to pause to re-consider my own perceived objectivity on issues. What I have come away from this thread is that you believe Cassel had a 'decent' game (one game) against an absolutely terrible opponent. I am inferring that you believe the board as a whole is too quick to 'jump' to that conclusion. I apologize in advance if I am only fanning the flames, but I'm just trying to make sure I know where you're coming from.

(And if you don't feel like responding, you certainly don't owe me any explanation...)

[Webbfann]

I'll play devil's advocate here. I didn't hear Adrian say what he said and it's all in the emphasis. Did he say "What do you think" with a derisive tone? Or was he merely being diplomatic and PC, merely deflecting the question? Also his comments about Cassell in the huddle are certainly a compliment to Matt, but they are in no way critical of Ponder. I'm not sure he meant otherwise, so I won't read anything into it. I think it's a stretch to say this was an endorsement of Cassell over Ponder, without hearing how it was said. And while not beyond the realm of possibility I think Adrian would more likely come out and just say it than imply it in an ambiguous way that some might find a bit unprofessional and undermining.

AD's take...

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/adrian-pet ... 00855.html

[psjordan]

[ I suppose what constitutes "blowing up" a defense is subjective but Cassel's performance certainly didn't strike me as exceptional.

Well somebody probably mentioned "blowing up" but I am sure that was simple forum hyperbole.
I think the only issue at hand is simply this - "moving forward, is Cassel capable of putting in better QB performances than Ponder?" It's not whether either one is even a "good" NFL quarterback compared to all the others. That's irrelevant. If they are the team's two legitimate choices, which is the better choice moving forward in terms of giving the team a better QB performance?

I think many feel that the sample size for Ponder is sufficient. I certainly do. Is the sample size for Cassel as QB of the Vikes sufficient? Nope. But in reality he did enough in the PIT game to warrant another start in the opinion of a lot of folks. You may not be one of them, which is fine of course. I wouldn't take it too "frustratingly", we are all after pretty much the same thing!

[Mothman]

If you're so inclined would you care to elaborate? (I'm not trying to 'stir the pot' here, I'm just trying to see where you're coming from.) I always like reading your thoughtful and insightful posts, and while I may not always agree with you, I always am able to understand where you are coming from on a given point. I think you present (or at least try to) thoughts in an objective manner and you frequently cause me to pause to re-consider my own perceived objectivity on issues

Thank you. I certainly try to be objective and my perception that objectivity and perspective have been in short supply around here this season is the source of a lot of my aggravation (they're not missing, just in short supply). That perception and the difficulty of discussing anything without it coming back around to Christian Ponder have become very frustrating and at times, I feel like people are posting about the games and comments in their heads rather than the actual games played and the actual comments posted here. I realize that won't be a popular thing to say but it's a dynamic I've perceived for a while. I sense a reduced interest in facts or verifiable information and an increased desire to just assume and believe the worst when it comes to the team and even in regard to some fans here. I'm not immune to these dynamics and that frustrates me too.

All of this probably sounds too confessional and it probably is... I'm just frustrated. This board should be a place to have fun and enjoy the Vikings but all too often, reading it just puts me in a bad mood. I realize the team's having a rough season so far so there's going to be venting, blaming, etc. but it should still be fun.

Anyway, that's where I'm coming from. Regarding the QBs...

What I have come away from this thread is that you believe Cassel had a 'decent' game (one game) against an absolutely terrible opponent. I am inferring that you believe the board as a whole is too quick to 'jump' to that conclusion. I apologize in advance if I am only fanning the flames, but I'm just trying to make sure I know where you're coming from.

You've basically got it right. In fact, I'd say Cassel had a good game against a terrible opponent but even though It's exciting to see the Vikes win and I was happy to see a more confident QB performance, I don't think it was anything special and I'm reluctant to read too much into one good game against a team that could turn out to be one of the worst in the NFL. To me, the biggest single difference in this game was the Vikes took care of the football. However, since they avoided turnovers against a team that hasn't forced any at all this year, I don't know how to read that information. There were still good opportunities for the Steelers to get turnovers so was this a step forward for the Vikes or did they just face an opponent who couldn't capitalize on their mistakes? Maybe it's both. I'm reluctant to jump to conclusions because I've seen how bad Cassel can be, I've seen how bad the Steelers are this year and the Vikes defense ended up in almost the same situation at the end of this game as they were in near the end of the previous two. Thankfully, they made a play to seal the win this time but nothing about this game, including Cassel's performance, convinced me this troubled 2013 Vikes team turned a corner. I'm worried that all we saw was a win over one of the opponents they could actually beat.

[Mothman]

Well somebody probably mentioned "blowing up" but I am sure that was simple forum hyperbole.
I think the only issue at hand is simply this - "moving forward, is Cassel capable of putting in better QB performances than Ponder?" It's not whether either one is even a "good" NFL quarterback compared to all the others. That's irrelevant. If they are the team's two legitimate choices, which is the better choice moving forward in terms of giving the team a better QB performance?

I think many feel that the sample size for Ponder is sufficient. I certainly do. Is the sample size for Cassel as QB of the Vikes sufficient? Nope. But in reality he did enough in the PIT game to warrant another start in the opinion of a lot of folks. You may not be one of them, which is fine of course. I wouldn't take it too "frustratingly", we are all after pretty much the same thing!

I AM one of them. I said so above and I wasn't frustrated because of anyone's preference for Cassel over Ponder. I was frustrated because I couldn't make a simple point about the former without people immediately talking about the latter and Ponder had no bearing the point I made. Now I'm frustrated because I just want to move on from the damn remark.

I've addressed this before but I'll address it again: there seems to be a perception out there that I'm a big Ponder fan and I'm not. I wanted him to succeed because that would have been the best thing for the Vikings and I wasn't quick to give up on him because after last season, I saw reasons to believe he might progress and become a pretty good QB this year. Instead, he's regressed and I agree that at this point, the sample size is sufficient. I hope Frazier and Spielman see it the same way.

I'm not excited about Cassel because I've seen enough of him over the years to feel he's nothing more than a bridge to the next QB and I hope Spielman sees him that way too.

[Webbfann]

It wasn't a Super Bowl performance but it was a momentum changer that we desperately needed. It was the difference between hopelessness and hope. And Cassell was a very important part of it, perhaps the most important part. You can argue about whether his performance was spectacular or not (it wasn't), but you can't argue about what a huge win it was regardless of the opponent. And you certainly CAN argue whether he was really that big a part of it, but it would look silly based on on objective review of all the available evidence.

Thankfully, they made a play to seal the win this time but nothing about this game, including Cassel's performance, convinced me this troubled 2013 Vikes team turned a corner. I'm worried that all we saw was a win over one of the opponents they could actually beat.

[The Breeze]

Thank you. I certainly try to be objective and my perception that objectivity and perspective have been in short supply around here this season is the source of a lot of my aggravation (they're not missing, just in short supply). That perception and the difficulty of discussing anything without it coming back around to Christian Ponder have become very frustrating and at times, I feel like people are posting about the games and comments in their heads rather than the actual games played and the actual comments posted here. I realize that won't be a popular thing to say but it's a dynamic I've perceived for a while. I sense a reduced interest in facts or verifiable information and an increased desire to just assume and believe the worst when it comes to the team and even in regard to some fans here. I'm not immune to these dynamics and that frustrates me too.

All of this probably sounds too confessional and it probably is... I'm just frustrated. This board should be a place to have fun and enjoy the Vikings but all too often, reading it just puts me in a bad mood. I realize the team's having a rough season so far so there's going to be venting, blaming, etc. but it should still be fun.

Anyway, that's where I'm coming from. Regarding the QBs...


You've basically got it right. In fact, I'd say Cassel had a good game against a terrible opponent but even though It's exciting to see the Vikes win and I was happy to see a more confident QB performance, I don't think it was anything special and I'm reluctant to read too much into one good game against a team that could turn out to be one of the worst in the NFL. To me, the biggest single difference in this game was the Vikes took care of the football. However, since they avoided turnovers against a team that hasn't forced any at all this year, I don't know how to read that information. There were still good opportunities for the Steelers to get turnovers so was this a step forward for the Vikes or did they just face an opponent who couldn't capitalize on their mistakes? Maybe it's both. I'm reluctant to jump to conclusions because I've seen how bad Cassel can be, I've seen how bad the Steelers are this year and the Vikes defense ended up in almost the same situation at the end of this game as they were in near the end of the previous two. Thankfully, they made a play to seal the win this time but nothing about this game, including Cassel's performance, convinced me this troubled 2013 Vikes team turned a corner. I'm worried that all we saw was a win over one of the opponents they could actually beat.

The second part of your post sums it up for me.
Thoug I'm not worried about the team as much as I am the state of VMB if Cassel can't keep up.

The extremes are difficult to navigate for some...and I am one of those.
I hope the Vikes can turn up their play and have a solid season. If not I'll be here to try and keep posters from going postal, or punching cats.

There's a lot of anguish in Vikingland due to how the QB situation has been mishandled for so long....seems like of of of steam is being blown off as a result.

It seems funny to me......the QB and all the noise. Fans being fans.

I will lol if Fraizer starts Ponder....it would be nuts in here ~