A message board dedicated to the discussion of Minnesota Viking Football.
https://www.vikingsmessageboard.com/
I thought it would be fun to go back and repost some of the comments from Ponder's first game that he started against the Packers in 2011:DKSweets wrote:I agree that week one was rough, and I was crucified for saying that he looked no better than the P-word. I truly cannot remember Ponder ever being as composed in the pocket as Teddy looked against Arizona, though, and his passes clearly have more zip. That is where I think he's already shown more ability, even if it is very early on.
"
"Thank you, if only to deter people from chanting "Teddy" next weekend when Matt is driving down the field.Purple Reign wrote: I thought it would be fun to go back and repost some of the comments from Ponder's first game that he started against the Packers in 2011:
Purple Reign wrote: I thought it would be fun to go back and repost some of the comments from Ponder's first game that he started against the Packers in 2011:
I did not want to see that. It's true, anybody could have made our team look better after Donovan McNabb.Just Me wrote:To be perfectly fair: Some of those comments about Ponder were also made after he has replaced Donovan "Pants..erm..football's on the ground" McNabb. Teddy's performance have been with Matt Cassel's performance as a backdrop (which would normally be faint praise, but Matt has been having outstanding games so far.)
None of which takes away from your main point: which was that some were every bit as excited for Ponder (early on) as some are for Bridgewater now. It's just too early to definitively say that Bridgewater will be that guy, but you still have to like where things might be going with him...
I hate this with every fiber of my diet.Funkytown wrote:ESPN - Study shows Packers have best fans in the NFL, followed by Broncos, Saints, Patriots and Ravens
I can deal with the Packers, but the Saints too?
Also to be even more fair, those Ponder quotes were for real games not preseason games.Just Me wrote:To be perfectly fair: Some of those comments about Ponder were also made after he has replaced Donovan "Pants..erm..football's on the ground" McNabb. Teddy's performance have been with Matt Cassel's performance as a backdrop (which would normally be faint praise, but Matt has been having outstanding games so far.)
None of which takes away from your main point: which was that some were every bit as excited for Ponder (early on) as some are for Bridgewater now. It's just too early to definitively say that Bridgewater will be that guy, but you still have to like where things might be going with him...
And to be even more fair: Here are Ponder's pre-season stats in 2011 (Rookie Season):Webbfann wrote: Also to be even more fair, those Ponder quotes were for real games not preseason games.
Small sample size is a pretty big problem here. I just don't think we can make any meaningful comparisons yet.Just Me wrote:[
Bridgewater is playing better (at this point in their respective careers) than Ponder. The only thing 'bad' about this comparison is that it is a small sample size for Bridgewater. Teddy could have two more games like the Raiders game (he'd still surpass Ponder's yardage, though) and he'd have a pre-season more in-line with Ponder's rookie pre-season.
And if we want to go back to 2006...Just Me wrote: And to be even more fair: Here are Ponder's pre-season stats in 2011 (Rookie Season):
Christian Ponder ATT-49, COMP-27, YDS-290, COMP%-55.1, YDS per ATT- 5.9, TDs-1, INT-0, Passer Rating- 79.5 (in a full pre-season) to compare with:
Teddy Bridgewater ATT-33, COMP-22, YDS-226, COMP%-66.7, YDS per ATT- 6.9, TDs-2, INT-0, Passer Rating- 106.3 (in half a pre-season).
Bridgewater is playing better (at this point in their respective careers) than Ponder. The only thing 'bad' about this comparison is that it is a small sample size for Bridgewater. Teddy could have two more games like the Raiders game (he'd still surpass Ponder's yardage, though) and he'd have a pre-season more in-line with Ponder's rookie pre-season.
GBFavreFan wrote:I was wondering how you guys would react to Favre's words recently. To explain it best, the GB Packer fans are the most insecure lot in sports, so the only way they will take Brett back is if he burns his purple jersey so to speak. However what he said is likely as harsh as its going to get as he will never outright lie about how he feels about the Vikings, but there are certain things he has to say and do to make peace with those people.
After that is done in 2015, I would look for more accurate statements to come out of Brett's mouth closer to his NFL hall of fame induction. Brett's been pretty clear how special his time in Minnesota was, so take comments he makes to Packer fans with a grain of salt. Even if he won a SB ring for us, he would still have to tell the Packer fans that his MN Super Bowl ring means as much to him as a ring from a Cracker Jack box. Of course he wouldn't mean that, but, well you know. We're dealing with Packer fans here ...
Revenge? I think he still wanted to play and the $20 million + contract had a lot to with it as well (I think they paid him about $25 million for two seasons).Purpnation wrote:You actually think Favre doesn't revere his one SB win over his NFCCG loss with the Vikes?
I know you like Favre, but face it, he signed with us for revenge, not for us. And unfortunately for him and us, he failed.
As it says at the link above:80 PurplePride 84 wrote:Favre came back in 2010 because he Childress and others got on their hands and knees begging him. I'm sure the $20 million or whatever it was didn't hurt either.
We now have the definitive answer to why Brett Favre decided to forgo retirement in 2010 and return to the Minnesota Vikings for what proved to be a second disastrous season.
"The money was too good," Favre said in an interview with Deion Sanders that aired on the NFL Network's "No Huddle: Favre and Sanders" show Thursday, July 19. "I hate to say it's about money, but I felt the money was a lot."