Vikings Message Board.Com

S197 wrote: Right. Sweeping generalities in any case is unwarranted, which is what I was trying to point out. For example, if I were to say, "Ponder has played poorly, he's never accurate!" I think everyone would agree that he has played poorly at times, but the area where you, Jim, and others take exception (and rightly so) is when I say he's never accurate. That's an erroneous simplification.

Well it's exactly the same when someone says the offense scored x and the defense gave up y. The offense did not score 30 points against Chicago, they scored 16. The defense did not give up 31 points, they gave up 24. The defense didn't give up 31 points to the Browns, they gave up 24. Can you see what I'm saying? The defense did play poorly, but showing the points for/against is not accurately telling the story.

As you can see in my last sentence, I in no way dismissed this is a team problem and have mentioned it in other threads as well.

Edit: And for the record, I have never, ever called anyone an apologist.

I understand what you are saying about generalities. And I should have made a better point about the defense and the score. I know the defense is not solely responsible for the 32 points a game. But then neither is Ponder responsible for all the points scored.

It's a team game. One person should not be shouldering the blame for overall team problems. While the QB is the one person who is most visible he is not the only one who make or breaks the game. People complain about him missing Webb, yet they don't say anything about him running it into the endzone two plays later. He missed the pass, therefore he sucks. They still scored. But now I will be called and apologist for saying that. (not by you) Ponder stunk it up pretty bad in Detroit. He did better in Chicago, and so-so in the Browns game. But to blame him strictly for the 0-3 is getting old. He's been part of the problem but not the only one. This team has issues. Issues on the O-line, the defense, and now it seems special teams. And of course the so-so play of our QB.

24 points a game is too much to give up regularly.

Mothman wrote: They ran one today.

When?

S197 wrote: I was taking it to an extreme to prove a point. He said a defense that allows more than 30 points a game is broken. The defense did not allow 30 points today, unless you erroneously attribute the score on special teams to the defense. Further, I stated rather emphatically that I did not give the defense a pass, a quote that you conveniently truncated which I do not appreciate if you're going to nit pick the plurality of a single word in an entire post.

I apologize if that bothered you. As an aside, I never understand why people get upset by it. I usually don't quote whole posts because it seems unnecessary when they are right there (usually just a few posts higher in the thread) to be read in their entirety. I try to quote posts in a way that will allow what I'm responding to and writing to flow well. I'm in no way trying to deceive, mislead or make anyone look bad if I truncate a post. I'm not trying to edit what was said. It's still right there to be seen so that would be pointless.

Anyway, I apologize and I'll add that I didn't say you were giving the defense a pass. I took note of it when you wrote it.

Finally: I "nitpicked" the plurality of your comment because, let's face it, the actual number of INTs Ponder has thrown that were returned for TDs this season is significant. I think we should try to be accurate about that stuff around here.

PurpleMustReign, they ran a WR screen to Patterson. I think Solomon Wilcots referred to it as a "smoke" screen during the broadcast.

If I'm not mistaken, they ran a TE screen to Rudolph too.

They don't run many RB screens so I assume that's what you're talking about. However, they run screen passes in just about every game.

On Offense I think the QB is holding us back. We have an embarrassment of riches at TE/WR right now. Jennings is everything we wanted him to be. CP84 looks like he has unlimited potential. Rudolph is solid. Wright/Simpson are both doing well and Webb isn’t all bad. Point is, we’ve got a great group of pass catchers… Then there is the guy throwing the ball. There are playcalling issues, but I think they are far overshadowed by the stuff Ponder is missing or making harder than it needs to be.

That being said we are averaging 30 points a game right now, yet we are 0-3. What gives?

Defense to me is the biggest question mark on this team. Inconsistent play, bad play calles, what seems like zero aggression, etc. We are unable to stop the underneath stuff and apparently the coaches have no answer. This feels like we are being far too conservative and that is hurting us. We’ve seen this from Frasier before, when the defense has a gap it is slow to fix. They really want to play base defense, but it isn’t working and now it seems like they have no answers?

What is sad is they are getting takeaways. They just can’t get off the stinking field.

Mothman wrote: I apologize if that bothered you. As an aside, I never understand why people get upset by it. I usually don't quote whole posts because it seems unnecessary when they are right there (usually just a few posts higher in the thread) to be read in their entirety. I try to quote posts in a way that will allow what I'm responding to and writing to flow well. I'm in no way trying to deceive, mislead or make anyone look bad if I truncate a post. I'm not trying to edit what was said. It's still right there to be seen so that would be pointless.

Anyway, I apologize and I'll add that I didn't say you were giving the defense a pass. I took note of it when you wrote it.

Finally: I "nitpicked" the plurality of your comment because, let's face it, the actual number of INTs Ponder has thrown that were returned for TDs this season is significant. I think we should try to be accurate about that stuff around here.

Lmao. Come on, Jim, be a team player

We are averaging 3 plus turnovers a game. What team wins doing that?

Mothman wrote:I apologize if that bothered you. As an aside, I never understand why people get upset by it. I usually don't quote whole posts because it seems unnecessary when they are right there (usually just a few posts higher in the thread) to be read in their entirety. I try to quote posts in a way that will allow what I'm responding to and writing to flow well. I'm in no way trying to deceive, mislead or make anyone look bad if I truncate a post. I'm not trying to edit what was said. It's still right there to be seen so that would be pointless.

Anyway, I apologize and I'll add that I didn't say you were giving the defense a pass. I took note of it when you wrote it.

Finally: I "nitpicked" the plurality of your comment because, let's face it, the actual number of INTs Ponder has thrown that were returned for TDs this season is significant. I think we should try to be accurate about that stuff around here.

I don't take an issue with truncating quotes, I do it all the time. What bothered me a little is the overall theme of your post was suggestive that I was sticking up for the defense, when I wasn't. This is why I closed with:

I'm not saying the defense should be absolved, when a team goes 0-3 there's a lack of execution everywhere but people need to stop pointing to the score as a basis for their conclusion unless they're going to account for everything.

To which you replied in your second response:

This defense doesn't deserve a defense. They have to play better if the team is going to win.

Were you just reinforcing what I had already said? It didn't come off that way.

The bottom line is you cannot say something like "Chicago scored 31 points, Minnesota scored 30" and from that draw a conclusion that the defense is at fault for the loss. Because as I pointed out, the offense only scored 16 of those points and the defense gave up 24. That's a fairly big difference wouldn't you agree? Moreso than pluralizing a single word yet you let that entire post slide. It just seems that you're becoming overly hawkish with anything people say about Ponder to the point where you are scrutinizing every word looking for something to defend. It should have been clear from my original post that I was not defending the defense nor was I attacking Ponder other than to point out that he contributed to the Bears' points.

Our defense is the majority of the problem in my opinion. They have been able to get some turnovers which really helps mitigate some things but take a look at the stats. They allow a LOT of yardage against them. They remind me of the defense we had in the 90s. A defense that was opportunistic but couldn't really stop anyone when it mattered. The difference is for a few years we had an offense that could put a lot of points on the board and made up for the Ds shortcomings.

The schemes are really attrocious if you ask me. Both offensively and defensively. I am not nearly as good at reading the plays as a lot of you guys but yesterday I called an aweful lot of them. Not specifically but I could tell by the formations if they were going to run or pass. That's really bad coaching. And That cover 2 has got to go. Ridiculous. Their recievers were so far open all day it was silly.

What's wrong?
1. Rotten coaching (schemes and such)
2. Poor QB play
3. Terrible LBs
4. Bad OL.

Fixes
1. Get a new OC Musgrave is too unimaginative. Play calling sucks.
2. Get a new DC- Someone who knows how to be aggressive and utilize the talent he has.
3. Get a good QB- A lot harder to do than the first two. Luck plays too much a part in this.
4. Get some good LBs
5. Shore up the OL with someone who can pass block.

Ponder is underwhelming and the defense is looking the way it did when Pagac was running it.

All of the forum butthurt of being 0-3 is amplified by the reality of how close they are to being 2-1 if not 3-0. Literally 1 or 2 plays in each game.

They are being outfoxed and out executed at critical moments. It's not a bad team....but they are missing something in the focus\heart department in places and at times that just wrecks the continuity of the teams efforts.

Seems like it's all been covered blame-wise.

Off to Londontown.

Churchill said, 'If you find yourself going through hell, keep going'

They can still turn it around, everything they are doing poorly is correctable~

S197 wrote:I don't take an issue with truncating quotes, I do it all the time. What bothered me a little is the overall theme of your post was suggestive that I was sticking up for the defense, when I wasn't. This is why I closed with:
To which you replied in your second response:
Were you just reinforcing what I had already said? It didn't come off that way.

The bottom line is you cannot say something like "Chicago scored 31 points, Minnesota scored 30" and from that draw a conclusion that the defense is at fault for the loss. Because as I pointed out, the offense only scored 16 of those points and the defense gave up 24. That's a fairly big difference wouldn't you agree? Moreso than pluralizing a single word yet you let that entire post slide. It just seems that you're becoming overly hawkish with anything people say about Ponder to the point where you are scrutinizing every word looking for something to defend. It should have been clear from my original post that I was not defending the defense nor was I attacking Ponder other than to point out that he contributed to the Bears' points.

I wouldn't have cared if you were attacking Ponder and I resent the "overly hawkish" comment a little (but just a little—I'm not that sensitive!), particularly in regard to that post, because I wasn't even defending Ponder. The main point of that post was to make sure we were dealing in facts. I pointed out that Ponder has one pick 6 because he does, not to defend him or to nitpick/irritate you. I pointed out the actual points scored and allowed by each unit to reinforce your point about just looking at the score and not considering the specifics and again, to put the facts out there for use in the ongoing discussion.

The rest of it was to reinforce how ugly things have been for the defense. A lot of it was meant to contribute to the overall discussion, not solely as a reply to you. I apologize again if that was unclear.

I think an argument could be made that QB play is the root cause of every problem this team is suffering from. I'm not saying I believe that, I'm saying that an argument could be made.

If you remove Ponder and insert, say, Rodgers...

The box is no longer stacked making life easier on the O-line
O-line in turn gives better protection allowing receivers to come open and allowing QB to go through progressions
With time for plays to unfold, the play calling looks much more competent
New QB makes quicker and better decisions, turns the ball over less
Holes open up allowing AD to run more freely in open space where he is less likely to turn the ball over
Trips to the red zone end in more TDs and less FGs/turnovers
Offense is now able to string together longer series which allows defense time to regroup
Drives that don't end in a score still put special teams in better field position
Ect
Ect
Ect

As I said, I don't believe it is all Ponders fault but excellent QB play could alleviate a lot of what ails us. Unfortunately the two guys sitting behind him on the bench are unlikely to be an upgrade

Yet the Packers are 1-2 because their defense has as many holes as the cheese they wear on their heads.

Again, having an elite quarterback isn't a cure-all if a team isn't around him for support.

PacificNorseWest wrote:Yet the Packers are 1-2 because their defense has as many holes as the cheese they wear on their heads.

Again, having an elite quarterback isn't a cure-all if a team isn't around him for support.

Put Adrian Peterson in GB and they would probably look a whole lot better. And, although it may not look it, I believe that the Vikings O-line and D/ST is more talented than GB this year.