Page 3 of 4
Re: Ponder inactive, Webb to start
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 2:22 am
by Arma
John_Viveiros wrote:Webb's Stat line:
11-30 for 180 yards and 1 TD and 1 INT for a 54.9 QB rating
Some other random (?) player's stat line in Lambeau this season:
12-25 for 119 yards and 1 TD and 2 INT's for a 41.9 QB rating (*in better weather conditions, *without playoff pressure, *with a gameplan actually designed for his strengths, *with a very successful running game to take off the pressure).
Sorry, but I just don't see the absolute certainty you guys all have in saying that this game dooms Joe Webb's ability to be a QB. Yes, it looked bad. But even playing this bad he still outgained the yardage total of the other guy who shall remain nameless in fully half of his 16 games. And against a tough opponent on the road, without the benefit of 21 prior starts.
Yes. There was some garbage time stat padding. But Ponder couldn't even do that early in the season. Hence, three games with under 100 yards passing.
For me, the most damning thing about Webb is that Frazier (who I like as a coach and trust a lot) has decided that Ponder is better at this point, or at least not worse enough to put his job on the line fighting against Spielman's designated QB.
So apparently "some" (way more then some) garbage stats against a prevent defense is good? Did you watch the game?
The hate for Ponder absolutely amazes me sometimes.
Re: Ponder inactive, Webb to start
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 2:44 am
by Eli
Somewhat of an embarrassing end to a surprising, overachieving season.
It amazes me that an organization which had received so much praise for personnel moves in the past 12 months could have two backup QBs that were so completely useless. Were they maybe just figuring that their starting QB would never get hurt? Or maybe just figuring that the season was a throwaway and the chances of playoffs too slim to worry about. It's no wonder Ponder played every down but three the entire season, no matter how badly he played - the coaches knew damned well that he was the only QB even worth putting on the field.
Re: Ponder inactive, Webb to start
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 4:19 am
by yesmanfan
John_Viveiros wrote:Webb's Stat line:
11-30 for 180 yards and 1 TD and 1 INT for a 54.9 QB rating
Some other random (?) player's stat line in Lambeau this season:
12-25 for 119 yards and 1 TD and 2 INT's for a 41.9 QB rating (*in better weather conditions, *without playoff pressure, *with a gameplan actually designed for his strengths, *with a very successful running game to take off the pressure).
Sorry, but I just don't see the absolute certainty you guys all have in saying that this game dooms Joe Webb's ability to be a QB. Yes, it looked bad. But even playing this bad he still outgained the yardage total of the other guy who shall remain nameless in fully half of his 16 games. And against a tough opponent on the road, without the benefit of 21 prior starts.
Yes. There was some garbage time stat padding. But Ponder couldn't even do that early in the season. Hence, three games with under 100 yards passing.
For me, the most damning thing about Webb is that Frazier (who I like as a coach and trust a lot) has decided that Ponder is better at this point, or at least not worse enough to put his job on the line fighting against Spielman's designated QB.
wow! some nfl fans just are blind. How can you not see how much better Ponder is than Webb??? blinded by your hate or just a fool? Webb is so bad and needs to be released asap, probably the worst QB in the entire league. Musgrave should have treated him like Navy treats their QB and I honestly think we would have had a chance. The option read and QB draws and play action roll out runs were working early and again late when they tried it again. Should have completely abandoned pocket passing late in the first quarter.
Re: Ponder inactive, Webb to start
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 4:20 am
by yesmanfan
DarthBrooks wrote:He was 11 for 30, with 180 yards. 36% passes completed with 6 yards per pass. One TD, one INT, with some of those yards coming in garbage time.
It would have been difficult for ANY QB to come into that situation. He was inaccurate early on but picked up later. Stuff like that, sailing balls over people's heads, takes doing a couple of times to get right and if his first start had been week four who knows but that he would have been a very good QB by now.
Tough game.
you cant be serious! he has zero potential in the NFL.
Re: Ponder inactive, Webb to start
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 6:05 am
by UKno1VIKING
yesmanfan wrote:
you cant be serious! he has zero potential in the NFL.
He has potential in the NFL, to be a WR again or a wildcat QB somewhere else.
Re: Ponder inactive, Webb to start
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 6:15 am
by Dark
I hear people say that if webb had been the starter for the past few games or more, that he would have been a better QB. A lot of backups come into games without having thrown a pass all year, and still succeed. Also, if we had started him a while back, we probably wouldn't have made the playoffs either.
Re: Ponder inactive, Webb to start
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 9:25 am
by John_Viveiros
Dark wrote:I hear people say that if webb had been the starter for the past few games or more, that he would have been a better QB. A lot of backups come into games without having thrown a pass all year, and still succeed. Also, if we had started him a while back, we probably wouldn't have made the playoffs either.
For Webb, I guess that makes sense if you consider yesterday's game to be the epitome of his potential. If you look at his Eagles, Lions, or Redskins games, you would have a different view.
But we are fans, and our memory is about one week long. Anyone who expresses disappointment at this season is looking at a one week time window. I remember the accolades that were thrown Troy Williamson's way on this board after he had his single good game. 2012 Ponder after the game at Green Bay - the guy isn't NFL material; Ponder at home vs. Green Bay - the Vikings may have found their QB of the future.
So in evaluating Ponder as a QB of the future... Well, after a mixed bag of 24 starts, we don't know. For Webb, after maybe 3 starts (does one consider it a "start" if it's unexpected and on the road, after a short week?), we really, really don't know.
Re: Ponder inactive, Webb to start
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 9:33 am
by Mothman
John_Viveiros wrote:
For Webb, I guess that makes sense if you consider yesterday's game to be the epitome of his potential. If you look at his Eagles, Lions, or Redskins games, you would have a different view.
But we are fans, and our memory is about one week long. Anyone who expresses disappointment at this season is looking at a one week time window. I remember the accolades that were thrown Troy Williamson's way on this board after he had his single good game. 2012 Ponder after the game at Green Bay - the guy isn't NFL material; Ponder at home vs. Green Bay - the Vikings may have found their QB of the future.
So in evaluating Ponder as a QB of the future... Well, after a mixed bag of 24 starts, we don't know. For Webb, after maybe 3 starts (does one consider it a "start" if it's unexpected and on the road, after a short week?), we really, really don't know.
Oh, we know...
I know you like Webb but he simply doesn't have the skills to be a viable option at QB beyond an occasional change of pace performance like those you mentioned above. He's given us a few fun moments but the Vikings need to replace him next season. He is NOT an NFL-caliber quarterback. The passing skills simply aren't there, even after 3 seasons in the NFL.
Re: Ponder inactive, Webb to start
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 9:39 am
by dead_poet
Mothman wrote:
Oh, we know...
I know you like Webb but he simply doesn't have the skills to be a viable option at QB beyond an occasional change of pace performance like those you mentioned above. He's given us a few fun moments but the Vikings need to replace him next season. He is NOT an NFL-caliber quarterback. The passing skills simply aren't there, even after 3 seasons in the NFL.
To be fair, he was put in an incredibly tough spot last night after not throwing a ball all season. But this is just further proof in my eyes we should have lived/died with Webb at WR where he would play to his obvious strengths. I fear it's too late now, which is a shame.
Re: Ponder inactive, Webb to start
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 9:48 am
by Lash Man
Its incredible to me that people still won't admit that Webb is NOT an NFL QB the way he played last night is what he is a talented athlete that can't throw the ball well or make decisions quickly . I think we " the Vikings" screwed him up by making him a QB he was coming out of the draft as a WR and Chilly saw he had a strong arm and Doh he will be a great QB , well it takes a hell of a lot more than a strong arm to be a NFL QB . I hope for the sake of the team we just release Joe and let him catch on with a team that needs a runner at that position .
Re: Ponder inactive, Webb to start
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 9:58 am
by Mothman
dead_poet wrote:be fair, he was put in an incredibly tough spot last night after not throwing a ball all season.
Sure, it was a tough spot but my assessment isn't just based on last night's performance. Webb simply doesn't have the skill set necessary to be a viable QB in the NFL for more than brief stretches.
But this is just further proof in my eyes we should have lived/died with Webb at WR where he would play to his obvious strengths. I fear it's too late now, which is a shame
I dont think he ever had the skill set to succeed there either. The guy is a marvelous athlete with a great attitude but he's a man without a position in the NFL.
Re: Ponder inactive, Webb to start
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 12:12 pm
by CalVike
Joe Webb came out of UAB as a WR for a reason, he had no upside as an NFL QB. The Vikings wasted two seasons trying to develop him and ended up with a zero sum backup at the QB position. They really did a lousy job there. Sage Rosenfels was not picked up by any NFL team this year so he clearly was not the answer. And the Vikings had two projects at backup behind the project they had at 1st string QB. Sure, I enjoyed seeing a game at Lambeau field, think Spielman and Frazier did a great job to bring this flawed but maturing team to 10-6, and think the team far exceeded expectations. It was great fun. But I will always wonder what might have been with a veteran backup QB who I have to think could have run the vanilla short passing schemes they designed for Ponder this year. It's like they made a conscious decision to have a bad backup in Webb who they knew could in no way challenge Ponder rather than get a decent backup. Very disappointing to me in that sense.
Re: Ponder inactive, Webb to start
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 12:17 pm
by PurplePPLEater
Arma wrote:
So apparently "some" (way more then some) garbage stats against a prevent defense is good? Did you watch the game?
The hate for Ponder absolutely amazes me sometimes.
+1.
I had a little too much "apple juice" in my system remember any stats from the 3rd quarter, but the only TD he threw was against blown coverage if I'm remembering correctly. Take away garbage time stat padding and Webb goes something like 8-25 (32%!), 80 yds, 0 TDs, 1 INT. He looked horrible last night regardless of any stat comparisons.
I really like Webb but I don't think it's worth it to try any experiment with him as a starting qb. I really doubt any NFL coaches would want to have him competing for any starting role. He's a hell of an athelete but not even as good as (hate to say this...) Tavaris Jackson at the quarterback position.
Re: Ponder inactive, Webb to start
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 6:05 pm
by chicagopurple
Webb was Godaweful... a fresh out of college kid with no camp time would have thrown better. the on,y receiver he proved he could hit was the dirt on the field. Honestly, the Vikes talent assemsment coaches are complete idiots...look what they have developed for us.....Ponder and Webb....they are the Laurel & Hardey of the NFL.....The Vikings will be a bad joke until we have a real QB, and right no we have NONE...I hope the ownership doesn't plan on carrying out the Wlater Peyton plan, where they do like the Bears of of 10-80;s and trot out a HISTORIC RB and nothing else, and assume (rightfully) that the fans will come and fill the stadium even though there is no hope of winning the Superbowl without a REAL QB.
Re: Ponder inactive, Webb to start
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 8:27 pm
by Just Me
chicagopurple wrote:Wlater Peyton plan
Wlater Peyton plan. Is that the plan where Peyton Manning wins later with Denver rather than with Indy?
(I know you meant Walter Peyton, but his last name is
Payton)
