The Breeze wrote:Just read that Fusco was surprised by the move and said that Cassel would be missed in the sense of vet leadership in the lockerroom. He also was in favor of keeping Ponder, citing the complexity of Turner's offense being a reason for wanting to keep guys on that have a grasp.
That part was interesting to me cause it speaks to what may have been Cordarelle's biggest issue and the whole offense in general...outside of injuries, suspensions and a rook under center.
This unit could make a leap this season just based on understanding the system better.
Throw in the return of the injured guys and possibly Peterson...who knows.
I was not under the impression that Turner's offense was so much complicated, rather it used a completely unique terminology.....maybe that's the same thing?
Just based on things I've read in the past, I think it's pretty complicated. Not only the terminology which varies in any scheme, but I remember a number of players last off season remarking on the vast quantity of the playbook as well.
I've also read before that Norv incorporates far more route "options" in his plays then a typical offense, which is about as complicated as an offense can get for a WR and puts more stress on the QB and WR being on the same page in reading the defense.
Thanks for that. No wonder CP84 struggled so much since he's still cutting his teeth at the position in general.
It bodes well for an improvement in the passing game this season.
I read that Turner said they had a plan in place for the backup QB and he downplayed the sentiment that it automatically meant someone from his past, but it sure sounds like a good idea to me.
Laserman wrote:
I agree, this was a stupid move. If Bridgewater goes down we are totally screwed if we don't get a vet in here asap. This move should have made been NEXT year after Teddy had a another Year under his belt. Gosh we continue to make bad moves at QB over and over and over
You mean next year when Cassel's contract is up and carries no trade value?? Yeah that makes sense. It's pretty obvious we are going to bring in a vet. We aren't going to draft a guy in the 7th and keep Devlin as our #3. My gosh people will you just let things play out instead of calling this a "stupid" move. I'll laugh even harder if Spielman uses that 5th round pick as part of a trade up deal for a legit talent in the back end of the first. Then we'll see how "stupid" this move is.
But yeah lets pay a 32 year old BACKUP QB $4 million to carry a clipboard. Is that suppose to be considered a "smart" move?? Backup QBs rarely ever carry any kind of trade value and we just received 2 picks for one.
Last edited by Pondering Her Percy on Thu Mar 05, 2015 12:06 am, edited 3 times in total.
The saddest thing in life is wasted talent and the choices you make will shape your life forever.
-Chazz Palminteri
saint33 wrote:why do people have to get so worked up over every little thing?
Matt Cassel was going to get released, straight up, and if not, I believe he had an opt available in his contract again this off season, so he was gone no matter what happened.
When I read this earlier today I was shocked that there was even a team willing to trade for him. Anything is good value for a Matt Cassel type player. Remember, Anquan Boldin was once traded for a 6th round pick coming off an incredible playoff run. Matt Cassel is mid-top level BACKUP QB coming of a season ending injury and we got probably more value than a 6th round pick for him.
This is exactly what I have been trying to say!! Is Matt Cassel playing for $4 million THAT much better than guys like Hoyer, Sanchez, Hill, Whitehurst, etc. player for $1-$2 million?? Not at all. So many people on here just jump the gun and say "oh great here comes Ponder" and "oh great we better hope Teddy doesnt go down"....(like Matt Cassel was going to save our season if Teddy did go down). Give me a break
The saddest thing in life is wasted talent and the choices you make will shape your life forever.
-Chazz Palminteri
I think the Vikings will miss Cassel if Bridgewater goes down for whatever reason. IMO, Cassel is an an effective starter when he has adequate protection. He also has developed chemistry with Jennings, familiarity with the other WR's and a year under Turners offense. I think Cassel is good enough to go .500 at the very least. He wouldn't save the season but I think he would keep the season from ending early. If Bridgewater went down for 6-8 weeks, the season would still be very salvageable.
I liked Cassel and his attitude for always being prepared. I wish him luck in Buffalo.
This will teach me to be too busy to check the boards. I didn't see this one coming this soon. But if the opportunity arises to better the team, go for it. Not that we gained a lot here but something is better than nothing. Jason Campbell would be a great back up for Teddy.
Don't hate on my Buckeyes. Some of the best Vikings went to Ohio State.
Including now, HOF WR #80 Cris Carter
LOL! Good call on Hostetler, Fiestavike. I was going to bring him up next.
Mike (Pondering), I understand your point and I certainly don't see Matt Cassel as the sort of backup QB capable of leading a team to Super Bowl victory but there have only been 49 Super Bowls and if I'm not mistaken, 8 of them were won by teams who had to ask their backup QB to get the job done. There's the aforementioned Earl Morrall, Tom Brady, Kurt Warner, and Jeff Hostetler. There's also Trent Dilfer, Jim Plunkett, Roger Staubach (who replaced Craig Morton as starter during the '71 season) and Terry Bradshaw (!) who had been relegated to the bench by the beginning of the '74 season after performing erratically in previous seasons.
I think it's putting the cart before the horse to suggest Teddy is so good already that the Vikes are screwed if he gets hurt. That will depend on who is backing him up but they had a losing record with him as starter last year so it's not as if he's already established himself as the difference between team success and failure after his rookie season.
fiestavike wrote:
I'm actually happy about the trade, I'm just not particularly sold on the argument that a season is pretty much lost if the starter goes down.
Same here. I'm quite happy with the trade. However, I made my views regarding the importance of the backup QB position clear a few months ago and I'm hoping the Vikes will spend the next few seasons working to make it a much stronger aspect of the team than it's been in recent years.
Mothman wrote:
Same here. I'm quite happy with the trade. However, I made my views regarding the importance of the backup QB position clear a few months ago and I'm hoping the Vikes will spend the next few seasons working to make it a much stronger aspect of the team than it's been in recent years.
Like you fine gentlemen, I would hope we don't neglect the position, since, as you have pointed out, it's very important position for a football team (backup QB, that is).
That said, Cassel isn't that guy - so good on us for getting compensation out of this.
you're still not proving anything and you know for a fact we would never see Matt Cassel on that cover