Vikings Message Board.Com

My Question is that we actually have 4 Ponder supporters, really?

Freeman will play as soon as he absorbs enough offense to play. Ponder is probably done for the season with this injury, maybe for his career. They didn't pay Freeman 3 million $ to stand on the sidelines.

Man I still don't believe in this Freeman guy. I hope he proves me wrong. I just don't know about this guy. Was he really worth getting in the middle of the season. We have a decent QB in Cassel. What wrong would it had been we stuck with Cassel for the remainder of the season?

JEC334 wrote:Man I still don't believe in this Freeman guy. I hope he proves me wrong. I just don't know about this guy. Was he really worth getting in the middle of the season. We have a decent QB in Cassel. What wrong would it had been we stuck with Cassel for the remainder of the season?

It is not the middle of the season it is 1/4 way in. He is the best prospect that the Vikes have had since Culpepper (not counting Favre of course).

S197 wrote: He's under contract for essentially 11 games (he's not playing this Sunday). If Freeman performs well, the ball is in his court and the Vikings can't do a thing but be another suitor. It's a "prove-it" contract for him but it's also a "if I do prove it, I might not stay" contract as well. Both sides are non-committal right now, I can't see that as any sort of long-term move. It looks a lot more like a salvage play to me.

I don't see it as salvage. The front office was patient enough for Ponder to prove again and again he isn't a starting QB. Both sides of this situation realize this could be a great thing for a long time. You don't sign a guy for $3 million+ to have him sit on the bench for 9 games then release him. The Vikes are hoping Freeman is the franchise QB for them.

Purple bruise wrote: It is not the middle of the season it is 1/4 way in. He is the best prospect that the Vikes have had since Culpepper (not counting Favre of course).

I'm already seeing the CulPepper and Freeman comparisons. They have similar abilities, big bodies and a big arm. I guess we have next our Randy Moss in Cordarelle Patterson. Instead of Culpepper to Moss will it be "Freeman to Patterson, what a play!"

Demi wrote: Yeah, Vikings wanted 2 years but Freeman would only sign for one. If he is in there plans beyond this year they better make sure not to yank him around going forward....

If he performs and both sides are enjoying the fit they can try and work a longer deal in December. They can always set the bonus to be paid in the spring. How many teams are going to be as hungry for a QB as the Vikings?

S197 wrote:He's under contract for essentially 11 games (he's not playing this Sunday). If Freeman performs well, the ball is in his court and the Vikings can't do a thing but be another suitor. It's a "prove-it" contract for him but it's also a "if I do prove it, I might not stay" contract as well. Both sides are non-committal right now, I can't see that as any sort of long-term move. It looks a lot more like a salvage play to me.

I think the idea with this sort of deal is that if a player in Freeman's situation gets an opportunity with another team and it goes well, if the player has success in that new situation, that success provides strong motivation to stay. That seems to be exactly what happened with Felton. There are no guarantees but there is an incentive to re-sign and a window between the end of the season and the beginning of free agency in which the team has the exclusive right to negotiate.

It's a short term move with long term potential.

Here's another thing it has potential for: Freeman stinks the place up and we don't want him to stay, or Freeman does well and doesn't want to stay, and Matt Cassel doesn't want stay after being thrown in the back seat despite doing his job well. Then we're stuck with you know who all over again.

I even felt sorry for Ponder on the news last night, saying he's the starting QB for this team because apparently nobody has hinted otherwise. He didn't look very convinced of what he was saying.

Webbfann wrote:Here's another thing it has potential for: Freeman stinks the place up and we don't want him to stay, or Freeman does well and doesn't want to stay, and Matt Cassel doesn't want stay after being thrown in the back seat despite doing his job well. Then we're stuck with you know who all over again.

I even felt sorry for Ponder on the news last night, saying he's the starting QB for this team because apparently nobody has hinted otherwise. He didn't look very convinced of what he was saying.

Or option C: Another QB FA signing next year, without any of the three above, and address long term via the draft. We are not "welded" to Ponder. Even if none of the contingency plans work for this year, it doesn't mean we won't have a plan for next year other than Ponder.

I can feel sorry for him too, but that doesn't mean that I want him as the starting quarterback. There are many players that have short careers (or never make it), so Ponder is ahead of the game in that respect...

Oh I don't want him back either, trust me...I just think honesty is the best policy and I don't think we're seeing it. Honesty would be telling CP7 he isn't the starter. I think this QB mess has a lot of potential downside that has the potential to leave us worse off than we were. But as always I hope I'm wrong. Just trying to temper this "no downside" talk.

I like how some people seem to think Cassell was our savior and starter the rest of the year. Did he look better than Ponder? Sure. Was it a good performance? Not really. He managed to not lose the game for us. We squeaked out a win against a bad, struggling Steelers team.

Cassell is not a starter, and you all would be up in arms if he started for us the rest of the way. I can guarantee you if this Josh Freeman signing didn't happen, we'd be seeing Ponder starting again within a few weeks as his ribs get magically better, after Cassell completely stinks up the joint.

I wouldn't be surprised if he has a terrible game this coming week. Carolina is coming off a loss, their defensive front 7 are monsters, and will be eating our OL alive. Cassell sucks under pressure and can't run. We could see Freeman under center as soon as the second half this week. (I'd actually say by the second quarter but I don't give our coaching staff enough credit to pull the trigger until after half time, even then I might be giving them too much credit to make a change).

lyzarde wrote:I like how some people seem to think Cassell was our savior and starter the rest of the year. Did he look better than Ponder? Sure. Was it a good performance? Not really.

I don't think Cassel is our "savior" and I don't think he will maintain this level of play consistently, but the man did post a 123.4 passer rating last game. What does he need to do to be considered good? (I'm not talking about his overall performance over his career, I'm talking about his performance in the Steelers game).

One-on-one with Freeman: http://www.vikings.com/media-vault/vide ... b8c7d3a61b

He sounds sleepy. He also collects pythons. He should get along well with Jared.

Just Me wrote: I don't think Cassel is our "savior" and I don't think he will maintain this level of play consistently, but the man did post a 123.4 passer rating last game. What does he need to do to be considered good? (I'm not talking about his overall performance over his career, I'm talking about his performance in the Steelers game).

We scored plenty and didn't turn the ball over. We also missed a basic field goal that would have made the game not so tight at the end. Cassel did do good