Webbfann wrote:You also don't see that Cassel is an unpgrade over Ponder, so this doesn't surprise me. You also don't see that you are biased against Cassel even though you never mention his good games or his wins (except to negate them by saying yeah we won, BUT...) or his good stats while you relentlessly point out his bad.
I'm not biased against Cassel. I point out his bad stats in the context of debates with people like you who want to proclaim him to be something he's not.
Right now on another thread you are talking about his second start, after being benched after a win, but no mention of his first start which gave us our first win. Hello? I wonder what your definition of bias is? It sure isn't how the rest of the world defines it.
LOL! It isn't? If you admittedly don't know how I define bias, how can you possibly tell if I define it the way the rest of the world does?
Trust me, my definition of bias is the same definition you'll find in most dictionaries and I have no bias against Matt Cassel. I have no reason to be biased against him.
If you want to talk about his first start, I'll be happy to do that. I didn't think he set himself apart. I said at the time that I thought he played pretty much like Ponder in that game. He made some nice throws over the middle but also threw several passes that should have been picked and weren't and was fortunate when Simpson recovered his fumble. He threw a simple out route that Greg Jennings turned into a long TD with a great run and a second TD to Jennings that was a beautiful read and throw. In the end, just as in previous games with Ponder at QB, when Cassel and the offense needed to put together a good, sustained drive to seal the game, they couldn't do it and it came down to defense in the final minutes. Unlike in previous weeks, the defense sealed the win. Cassel's performance was good enough to earn him a second start and a chance to really set himself apart and seize the job which, as I pointed out above, he failed to do.
You don't see how a coach (Zimmer) who consistently obtains much better results from his players than Frazier is an upgrade?
I've already said that I think he
could be an upgrade. I'm just not assuming it. It hardly seems unreasonable to take the position that he hasn't proven it yet because... wait for it... he hasn't proven it yet. Zimmer hasn't coached a game for the Vikings. How can you, I or anybody else possibly
know that he's an upgrade? He's taking on a role he's never had before and it's a role that requires different skills than being a coordinator. Some coordinators make that transition and are immensely successful and for others, including Frazier, it doesn't work out.
Nobody can make you see it. You have to make an effort to see through your bias towards your favorite peoples so you can learn to see others objectively on their own merits.

How am I being unobjective? I don't think I'm the one who's allowing a strong bias to color his opinions here. I'm not insisting that a veteran QB whose overall stats and performances over the
exact same period of time as Ponder's first 3 seasons are very comparable is such a huge upgrade that it was "utter incompetence" not to see it or that a coach who hasn't coached a single game as an NFL head coach is clearly an upgrade when he hasn't proven his effectiveness yet. I'm taking a reasonable position and backing my views with stats and facts about actual performances, not assumptions based on... bias!
If Zimmer's a better head coach than Frazier, he'll prove it and I'll be happy. As for Cassel, am I wrong in saying he played so poorly that his former team cut him and that last year, even though he played some of the best games we saw from a Vikings QB all year, he was also the QB in 3 of their 4 least productive offensive performances? Is it biased or accurate to say he was inconsistent and unreliable? Has he or has he not thrown more INTs than TDs in the past 3 seasons? Is this a trait you want in a starting QB?
I'm being objective about Matt Cassel. You just don't want to hear it.