Opinions are great, but they don't mean much if they aren't backed by any sort of relevant facts/data. Statistically, Cassel has been just as bad if not worse than Ponder for almost all of his career, including last season. If he was actually that much better it would show up on the stats sheet somewhere.jackal wrote: Yeah three times as many losses as win plus a tie and Cassel with a 50 percent win record per start with no consistent training time with the
number ones either. Ponder had 33 percent wins per start with several years in the starting role. That's 8 wins for Cassel average and 4.5 wins
for Ponder. Yeah they are exactly the same --.. Ponder sucks really really bad and Cassel has been okay.. Cassel is not Tom Brady
but he did a good job for us. Cassel is not Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning okay; however, only four or five teams have great QB's. I'm guessing
Bridgewater can be around the pro bowl level at his best which is great, if that works out. Not an All Pro like Rodgers or Brees, but pretty good.
Teddy Bridgewater
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Teddy Bridgewater
Re: Teddy Bridgewater
The Fact is Cassel won almost twice the percentage as Ponder did last year. 50 precent to 33 percentOpinions are great, but they don't mean much if they aren't backed by any sort of relevant facts/data. Statistically, Cassel has been just as bad if not worse than Ponder for almost all of his career, including last season. If he was actually that much better it would show up on the stats sheet somewhere.
I think winning is kind of important thing .. don't you ??

no one expects the Spanish Inquisition!
-
- Commissioner
- Posts: 24788
- Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
- Location: Des Moines, Iowa
- x 108
Re: Teddy Bridgewater
Ha! If only this wasn't a team sport. Drat.jackal wrote: The Fact is Cassel won almost twice the percentage as Ponder did last year. 50 precent to 33 percent
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
Re: Teddy Bridgewater
Not even the slightest bit when comparing players against each other.jackal wrote: The Fact is Cassel won almost twice the percentage as Ponder did last year. 50 precent to 33 percent
I think winning is kind of important thing .. don't you ??
Re: Teddy Bridgewater
... especially when looking at such a small sample size. Last season illustrates that more clearly than most. When you consider the blown leads, Gould's missed FG in OT at the Metrodome, etc. it's clear that with absolutely no change in the way the two QBs performed, their W/L/ records for 2013 could be quite different. It's just not a very good way to measure their differences.maembe wrote: Not even the slightest bit when comparing players against each other.
-
- All Pro Elite Player
- Posts: 1878
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 7:35 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
Re: Teddy Bridgewater
maembe wrote:
Start off with the common sense smell test.
A successful coach needs a patient wife, loyal dog, and great quarterback - and not necessarily in that order.
-- Bud Grant
-- Bud Grant
-
- All Pro Elite Player
- Posts: 1878
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 7:35 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
Re: Teddy Bridgewater
maembe wrote: This ignores rushing, in which case they were virtually identical statistically:
Ponder: 1799 yards (200/game); 11 TD; 9 ints; 51.2 QBR
Cassel: 1864 yards (206/game); 12 TD; 9 ints; 48.7 QBR
The team also scored more points with Ponder at QB.
Any way you slice it, Cassel was not a significant improvement.
I guess that's why Cassel was resigned as a temp starter so Ponder could be pushed down the bench at 3rd on the depth chart.
A successful coach needs a patient wife, loyal dog, and great quarterback - and not necessarily in that order.
-- Bud Grant
-- Bud Grant
Re: Teddy Bridgewater
Well, at this point, I'd say there are now plenty of indications in this thread that there are indeed fans who believe Cassel is "considerably" better than Ponder. 

Re: Teddy Bridgewater
This is turning into more of an argument than a debate... I like Cassel more as a QB and you don't..
Lets just hope that however is the QB moving forward gets it done and the Vikings get back to
winning and sweeping the pee stained men from Green Bay....Maybe even a shiny ring someday SKOL
Lets just hope that however is the QB moving forward gets it done and the Vikings get back to
winning and sweeping the pee stained men from Green Bay....Maybe even a shiny ring someday SKOL

no one expects the Spanish Inquisition!
Re: Teddy Bridgewater
808vikingsfan wrote:Especially when you leave out the opposition each qb faced. Ponder faced the bottom half of the nfl while Cassel played against the top half
That's an exaggeration (consider Seattle, Cleveland, and Philadelphia), although I understand the point you're making.
True... and the circumstances are different pretty much every week, regardless of who is starting, which is why wins make a poor barometer when comparing the two QBs head-to-head.Cassel also started when AD was limited or out in 4 of his starts.
The argument isn't even over who should have started or who is better. It's just about how much better Cassel was than Ponder. That's how far dislike of the latter seems to extend. I think half of Vikings fandom is suffering from some form of PTSD (Ponder-induced Traumatic Stress Disorder).I really dont know how there can be an argument. Ask Adrian or Jennings who they think should have started last season.

What's relevant at this point isn't whether Cassel is a little better than Ponder or significantly better than Ponder, it's how good he is as a starter because that's the role he's set to play. This whole mini-debate was triggered by Goessling's article and suggestion that Cassel is the perfect custodian for the QB position, thus giving the Vikings the luxury of time with Bridgewater. They can take their time if they'd like (it's their decision) but it remains to be seen if that will be a luxury (ie: Cassel's play means they have no need to turn to the rookie) or just a choice (they need better QB play but refuse to turn to Bridgewater because they don't want to play him yet).
Re: Teddy Bridgewater
That's a closely debated argument among NFL teams and coaches ... Which is better sitting and allowing him to learn the NFL or throwing him into the deep end of the pool andWhat's relevant at this point isn't whether Cassel is a little better than Ponder or significantly better than Ponder, it's how good he is as a starter because that's the role he's set to play. This whole mini-debate was triggered by Goessling's article and suggestion that Cassel is the perfect custodian for the QB position, thus giving the Vikings the luxury of time with Bridgewater. They can take their time if they'd like (it's their decision) but it remains to be seen if that will be a luxury (ie: Cassel's play means they have no need to turn to the rookie) or just a choice (they need better QB play but refuse to turn to Bridgewater because they don't want to play him yet).
seeing what happens. Before i give my opinion on Teddy starting for the Vikings this year, I want to make things clear. I didn't want Bridgewater to be honest his pro day scared me
and Mayock's reaction to it(I wanted Savage or one of those guys in the top of the third; I was assuming we had Cassel to give them time to learn...) I have to admit I have changed my
opinion based of videos and coaches and players reactions of Teddy, so far. I say let him play day one for several reasons. 1). One a lot of the fundamentals he needs he already has reads,
quick release and route understanding...2). I don't think Cassel and Bridgewater are very far apart in game play ability right now (assuming they are close in camp--- when they throw Bridgewater
deeper into the pool and preseason..) 3. Offenses take time and I don't think Cassel is our future long term (one or two seasons). 4. Peterson will draw attention from defenses and every
year he gets older 7 years in the league now. 5. assuming Teddy does well and Peterson has three years left; in two or three years, we should have everything working to make a push and
NFL windows don't stay open, forever..
no one expects the Spanish Inquisition!
-
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 6652
- Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:28 pm
- x 21
Re: Teddy Bridgewater
The fact that this board is still debating Ponder vs. Cassel makes my head spin.
I will silence this debate right now: Cassel is better than Ponder but Teddy Bridgewater will be better than both. Debate over.
I will silence this debate right now: Cassel is better than Ponder but Teddy Bridgewater will be better than both. Debate over.
A Randy Moss fan for life. A Kevin Williams fan for life.
Re: Teddy Bridgewater
Not to be pedantic (Well...OK, I'm being pedanticHardcoreVikesFan wrote:The fact that this board is still debating Ponder vs. Cassel makes my head spin.


I've told people a million times not to exaggerate!
-
- All Pro Elite Player
- Posts: 1878
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 7:35 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
Re: Teddy Bridgewater
HardcoreVikesFan wrote:The fact that this board is still debating Ponder vs. Cassel makes my head spin.
I will silence this debate right now: Cassel is better than Ponder but Teddy Bridgewater will be better than both. Debate over.
I can agree 100% by adding one word.
but Teddy Bridgewater will EVENTUALLY be better than both.
A successful coach needs a patient wife, loyal dog, and great quarterback - and not necessarily in that order.
-- Bud Grant
-- Bud Grant
-
- Franchise Player
- Posts: 441
- Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:29 am
Re: Teddy Bridgewater
Just my opinion, but I don't think it will take nearly as long as people thing.headless_norseman wrote:
I can agree 100% by adding one word.
but Teddy Bridgewater will EVENTUALLY be better than both.
I think Bridgewater will be a good QB right off the bat, and that is all he really has to be to eclipse Ponder and Cassel. (Good)