Frazier-Spielman, schism?

[Eli]

My point is Rick Spielman was apparently anxious to some extent to sign Cassel, yet Leslie Frazier seems to be in no hurry to name him the starter. Those two actions don't seem to jive right?

You can't be serious. Cassel was brought in to be a backup. Period.

[Funkytown]

I don't necessarily think there is bad blood between the two, but perhaps Spielman and Frazier are not on the same page as for the Vikings QB situation.

Maybe these two disagree on the Ponder/Cassel thing?

It's a possibility, but I think it has more to do with staying committed to Ponder as to why they weren't in a big hurry to name Cassel the starter. Plus, they were probably waiting for more information on the injury. I don't think teams are obligated to tell the media anything and everything, and especially not ASAP. It is what it is, but they said all along that Ponder is the guy--so it'd make sense to stick with that. And even if they are having doubts--which they probably aren't--this injury buys them time to figure it out. They repeated "Ponder is the man" several times--no way they are going to go back on that through one quarter of the season--or at least not admit to it right this second.

[mansquatch]

Cassel was brought in as the back up and it was stated as such when he was signed.

Frasier is a player's coach and my concern is that he has something of a history of believing in a player to a fault. See the following situations: McNabb, Josh Robinson starting over Rhodes, Marvin Mitchell starting over Bishop, Cordarrel Patterson not seeing the field more, etc. This, IMO, is a plausible reason for why we are hearing the Ponder as the starter stuff. It is also one of my bigger sources of irritation with Frasier.

On the flipside there is the fact that Frasier's contract is up this year. So it would seem at least based on the performances the past four sundays that Cassel would be a much better candidate to secure Frasier's continued emploment as a head coach.

I have no idea what is actually going on. The above are just two possible scenarios.

On the Spielman angle: Why do people think Spieleman is all protective of "his guys"? That doesn't add up to me. Spielman drafted Harvin and then shopped him when his attitude issues became apparent. Spielman was huge on Rosenfels and then cut him without him ever starting a game. Spielman cut Winfield when the salary math didn't add up. This doesn't seem like a guy who is going to be all cozy with "his players".

[maembe]

If Spielman brought in Cassell with the intent of having him be the starter I take back every good thing I've ever said about him.

[King James]

I pretty much figured Cassel to be brought in as an insurance policy. I didn't think it was a plan but I know they wanted to avoid the situation we were in last season when Ponder went down.

[mondry]

Really don't think there's anything to this. I was watching a football life on steve sabol I think it was and Jaws was on there talking about one of the moments they captured on film. He was talking about the crowd booing him and how it was effecting him negatively when his coach pulled him over and said something like "they've booed every QB that's ever played here, that doesn't matter, YOU'RE MY QB." He went on to say how the believe / faith in him from his coach is what pulled him through those low times.

Personally, I think Frazier and Spielman are on the same page about everything. I think this is just how you handle a young QB who's struggling. No matter what unless you're 100% done with them you have to show you believe in them still. They may well be 99% done with Ponder but you don't gain anything from burning that bridge in the bye week or any other week. Should they decide they want to play Matt for the rest of the year, as soon as they say that, there's no going back but also Matt's a professional / veteran, if he gets the nod he gets the nod. He isn't going to cry or whine that they're saying Ponder's the guy.

All in all it's just how a professional organization that isn't a joke, operates.

[King James]

Really don't think there's anything to this. I was watching a football life on steve sabol I think it was and Jaws was on there talking about one of the moments they captured on film. He was talking about the crowd booing him and how it was effecting him negatively when his coach pulled him over and said something like "they've booed every QB that's ever played here, that doesn't matter, YOU'RE MY QB." He went on to say how the believe / faith in him from his coach is what pulled him through those low times.

Personally, I think Frazier and Spielman are on the same page about everything. I think this is just how you handle a young QB who's struggling. No matter what unless you're 100% done with them you have to show you believe in them still. They may well be 99% done with Ponder but you don't gain anything from burning that bridge in the bye week or any other week. Should they decide they want to play Matt for the rest of the year, as soon as they say that, there's no going back but also Matt's a professional / veteran, if he gets the nod he gets the nod. He isn't going to cry or whine that they're saying Ponder's the guy.

All in all it's just how a professional organization that isn't a joke, operates.

You said it better than I did. That's what I was trying to say in another thread. If Ponder is benched in favor of Cassel, if Cassel begins to suck there's no going back to Ponder. Benching Ponder is basically saying his chances of ever starting as a Viking again is slim to none. With Ponder being a young, struggling QB, I can see why they're trying everything they can to stick with him. They spent a 1st rounder on him. I know they want to prove that he wasn't a reach. They might as well burn that bridge and admit Ponder wasn't the right choice. We all get it wrong but we still can still correct the situation temporarily with Cassel.

[Mothman]

If Spielman brought in Cassell with the intent of having him be the starter I take back every good thing I've ever said about him.

[Mothman]

I don't believe he outright had a plan for Cassel to be the starter, but maybe he signed him knowing he might need to step in at some point specifically due to Ponder's performance.

I think he signed him knowing his backup QB might have to step in at some point, period. It's really not necessary to look any further than Joe Webb's performance in the playoffs last year to see exactly why they felt the need to bring in a veteran backup QB.

[mondry]

I think he signed him knowing his backup QB might have to step in at some point, period. It's really not necessary to look any further than Joe Webb's performance in the playoffs last year to see exactly why they felt the need to bring in a veteran backup QB.

Yeah, and let's not forget what is actually happening too! Our starting QB is injured, the back up came in and got a win so the over all idea of "we need a better back up so we can get a win or two when the starter is hurt" has already come to fruition. The idea that that back up is probably capable of outperforming the starter is just gravy imo so kudos to spielman for bringing in a better option than we had.

[J. Kapp 11]

All Frazier is doing right now is holding out for as long as he can. If Ponder's injury keeps him out a month, for example, there's no reason to name Cassel the starter long-term, even If that's what Frazier intends. If he names Cassel the starter and Cassel starts sucking, it's nearly impossible to go back to Ponder. Now you look like you can't pick the best QB.

But if Cassel plays like an all-pro, nobody will blame Frazier for sticking with him when Ponder is healthy (see Alex Smith/Colin Kaepernick last year).

As for Cassel's signing, I think it was predicated BOTH on the obvious need for a quality backup AND Ponder's uncertain growth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

[Eli]

As for Cassel's signing, I think it was predicated BOTH on the obvious need for a quality backup AND Ponder's uncertain growth.

I disagree. The backup situation was -BAD- with only Joe Webb and MBT in reserve. The Vikings had to sign a veteran. The growth or success or failure of Ponder never played into it. That will (or should) be obvious to anyone when Ponder is put back in as the starter.

[S197]

Posts were removed, personal attacks are against board policy. Instead of replying please use the report button and we will take care of it. Thanks.

[J. Kapp 11]

I disagree. The backup situation was -BAD- with only Joe Webb and MBT in reserve. The Vikings had to sign a veteran. The growth or success or failure of Ponder never played into it. That will (or should) be obvious to anyone when Ponder is put back in as the starter.

OK so if Ponder is NOT put back in as the starter, will you come back here and say you're wrong?

Cuz the only way to know whether your speculative opinion is more correct than my speculative opinion is exactly what you suggested -- if they go back to Ponder even if Cassel is playing well and winning games.

You agree to come back and say you're wrong if you are, and so will I. Deal?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

[Eli]

You agree to come back and say you're wrong if you are, and so will I. Deal?

There's just one small problem there...

If the Vikings return Ponder to the starting lineup, it will pretty much prove my assertion that they never intended to use Cassel as a starter in case of Ponder's failure. Note that Ponder may be back after missing just a single game, as it will be a full three weeks between when he was injured and the Carolina game. If he does return then, the entire body of Cassel's work this season will have been one game against a pretty awful Steelers' team.

However, if Cassel does remain the starter, it doesn't necessarily prove the intention of using him as contingency plan at the time that they signed him. That decision might only have come after he proved he could play with some competence following Ponder's terrible start and subsequent injury.