CalVike wrote:The Frazier era completely dovetailed the Ponder era. Why is it so hard for so many to admit Spielman and Frazier share blame nearly equally for the past three seasons. This defense was horrible week 1, before any injuries, that suggests lack of talent from the GM. Spare me the tired arguments about soft cover 2 schemes and how good Audie Cole and Matt Cassel are.
When you put it that way it really sounds funny to me.
Spielman whiffed on ALL the Vikings QBs this year. All were inconsistent. Just admit Spielman shares blame and stop deifying him. He has potential, just like Frazier had potential after guiding the Vikings to four straight wins and the playoffs after the disaster Ponder had mid-season last year. It wasn't Frazier who picked a loser like Joe Webb to be the backup QB last year, decimating the playoff hopes. I am not saying Frazier walks on water or that he should have been retained, just that Spielman shares blame. Spielman's overt efforts to distance himself from Frazier today were disgraceful. When Spielman is fired in two years, your tune may change.
Well said. I think the reason Spielman's taking extra heat right now is because of the way he seemed to distance himself from what's happened when he's clearly as responsible for it as anyone.
Outside of the QB disaster, Frazier deserved to be fired. His personnel decisions were horrible. He fail to teach the team how to close on 4th quarter, nor those even attempt to make any halftime adjustment. He refused to change the defensive scheme and kept us in that putrid Tampa 2 Defense. He hired coordinators with questionable playing calling ability. Not to mention he WAS the one who pushed for McNabb. Spielman didn't want him but did it because he thought Frazier knew what he was doing. Once the McNabb experiment imploded, I knew it would only get worse. Ponder was thrown into the wolves and never really got a chance to develop. We just kept throwing him into games every Sunday and crossing our fingers, hoping that he would miraculously become good over night.
Obviously Ponder wasn't ready, and Frazier knew it. If he was ready, McNabb wouldn't have been there. And before someone say the lockout had something to do with it, Dalton still made the playoffs as a rookie that season. Ponder wasn't ready to lead but we had no one else to go to. So Frazier stuck with Ponder when he had a few opportunities to save this team. 2012 during the preseason, Sage Rosenfels outperformed Ponder, MBT, and Joe Webb but Sage gets cut. Now he wasn't the answer by any means, but at that time he was the better option than what we had. With him still on the team as QB, instead of Webb, we probably would have had a better chance against GB. In 2013, now Cassel outperforms Ponder in the preseason and Ponder still got the start no matter how crappy he played.
So yes, Frazier deserves all the blame. It's not like Spielman gave him nothing to work with. Frazier had plenty to work with but had his better players on the bench while the mediocre talent getting to start. This is his fault. He deserved to be fired and should have been fired sooner.
Mothman wrote:
... and that meant there was no way he was going to publicly throw ownership or Spielman under the bus for that debacle. He handled it the only way he could, by playing the guy they wanted to see at QB and sticking with him for four dismal quarters to send a clear message that it was a dumb idea.
I actually agree with this. I absolutely believe Frazier played Freeman to "stick it to Rick". But this is passive-aggressive behavior, he should have just had a spine and kept playing Cassel. But he still believed Ponder gave us the best chance. This all just oozes great qualities as a leader, doesn't it?
Webbfann wrote:
I actually agree with this. I absolutely believe Frazier played Freeman to "stick it to Rick". But this is passive-aggressive behavior, he should have just had a spine and kept playing Cassel.
That "tough talk" is easy for you to say but defying the boss doesn't always go over well.
But he still believed Ponder gave us the best chance.
Eh, for all we know that was just a line too. If they were determined at an organizational level to "play out their hand" with Ponder and give him most of the 3 years Spielman always says it takes to evaluate a QB, then what else was Frazier supposed to say? The head coach can't step up to the podium and say, "We're playing this guy. We don't think he gives us the best chance to win but we're playing him anyway". You can't sell that to anybody.
Mothman wrote:Eh, for all we know that was just a line too. If they were determined at an organizational level to "play out their hand" with Ponder and give him most of the 3 years Spielman always says it takes to evaluate a QB, then what else was Frazier supposed to say?
Well, if we go the "it was jammed down his throat" line of thinking, which is certainly possible, wouldn't you say Frazier would have WANTED to get fired then? I mean, that seems an untenable situation for a HC - who would want to stay?
IMO the QB Carousel this year stinks of ownership/mgmt interference and is really a point that deserves deeper analysis. I'm not defening Spielman here, but we are ASSUMING it was Rick asking to put Freeman in. Do we know it wasn't ownership? Frasier went around Spielman and met with Ownership over his firing. That "could" indicate that there is not a clean line of authority and ownership will override things. (look how Childress ran roughshod during his time here.) IMO this deserves a deeper look, but we'll never get any info on this kind of stuff. Hopefully we do not have a closet Daniel Snyder on our hands...
There is no proof, but IMO the QB stuff stinks of upper mgmt overriding the coach. My reason for thinking this is that this type of decisionmaking is completely inconsistent with the rest of Frasier's decision making on starters. Frasier's MO throughout his time as HC was to have faith in "his guy" to a fault. How many times on this board have people harped on Audie Cole, CP getting on the field, Cassel over Ponder, etc. etc. etc. Starting Freeman does not fit that mold at all.
However...
The performance of the defense, the soft cheme, 4Q collapses, ARE on Frasier and were worthy of a firing. IMO the defense lost us more games this year than the offense. Statistically the defense has declined every year since Frasier took over and he was at the helm for two of the worst seasons in Franchise history. IMO, there was plenty of meat to justify termination, it just wasn't on the offensive side of football.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi
Its pretty simple....Frazier was a nice guy (meaningless in competitive sports OR business world), but a crappy judge of talent, poor game planner, and seemingly UNABLE to develop talent. Very oddly for a very good defensive player, he proved unable to teach our defenders how to tackle well, stay within their roles, etc. He IS NOT a top talent coach and we should not settle for someone who is just a nice guy.
psjordan wrote:
Well, if we go the "it was jammed down his throat" line of thinking, which is certainly possible, wouldn't you say Frazier would have WANTED to get fired then? I mean, that seems an untenable situation for a HC - who would want to stay?
Maybe... or maybe he just wanted to get them to back off. I don't think an NFL head coaching job is something many coaches want to walk away from if they can avoid it, especially if it's their first shot as an NFL HC. You don't see many people quitting these jobs unless they choose to retire. They're hard to get and even harder to keep.
op you sound like you dont know what youre talking about. frazier took over tomlins defense when he became coordinator and the defense was trash after that and he clearly has no idea how to pick talent or personnel, he plays guys based on how much he likes them as a person over how good they are. he also had the final say in the starting qb which he clearly is incapable of determining who the best option is.
he also has zero idea of how to adjust during a game as shown all season long, if he had the slightest idea of how to do so, we could have won the division this year. he had a 21-32 record in 3 1/2 years and gave us two beyond embarrassing seasons during that time. it was time to move on as there was absolutely no indication of him turning that around. sure, he is a nice guy, but that doesn't mean anything.
It was time for a change. If players really loved Frazier...why in the hell don't you win for him? It was painfully obvious our D was a mess from Week 1. Spielman is to blame for talent but Frazier trotted out guys like Henderson at MLB and for some reason ignored guys like Bishop
Good article but at the same time....give me a break Ryan Longwell. Of course he is going to be bitter towards Spielman because Spielman is the one that let him go. And it was for arguably one of the best kickers in the NFL so who really cares about his take on the matter.
The saddest thing in life is wasted talent and the choices you make will shape your life forever.
-Chazz Palminteri
When you put it that way it really sounds funny to me.