Confidence in Christian Part II

[vikeinmontana]

these threads always get so funny. it's been mentioned before but i always find it interesting that we are so hard on our own players and team and act like every other team is running on all cylinders! you name me any qb and i can find several possessions where they didn't look good this weekend. manning had a great game but i saw him throw some bad passes, mis-read coverage, and struggle in areas. same with rodgers. and brees. and stafford. and rg3. and everyone else. ponder looked far from perfect. at times he looked bad. at times he looked ok. and at times i thought he looked damn good. your hope is that as time goes on he looks damn good way more than he looks bad.

people are really jumping to conclusions on both sides of this argument.

[Mothman]

these threads always get so funny. it's been mentioned before but i always find it interesting that we are so hard on our own players and team and act like every other team is running on all cylinders! you name me any qb and i can find several possessions where they didn't look good this weekend. manning had a great game but i saw him throw some bad passes, mis-read coverage, and struggle in areas. same with rodgers. and brees. and stafford. and rg3. and everyone else. ponder looked far from perfect. at times he looked bad. at times he looked ok. and at times i thought he looked damn good. your hope is that as time goes on he looks damn good way more than he looks bad.

people are really jumping to conclusions on both sides of this argument.

In the end, it was just one game and the only conclusions that can be drawn are about that one game. However, I think there were good reasons to find Ponder's overall performance encouraging. Peterson's amazing return to the field and Walsh's big time debut are getting more attention but it's nice that Ponder's performance hasn't been overlooked:

Vikings: QB Christian Ponder's growth on display Sunday

Lost in all the excitement over the Minnesota Vikings' thrilling overtime victory Sunday and the triumphant return of RB Adrian Peterson, was a clutch performance by QB Christian Ponder that is worth recognizing.

Ponder started slow in the first half against the Jaguars until a scoring drive right before half time jump-started the offense and appeared to set the course for the rest of the game.

He was 4 of 4 on the drive that led to a Peterson touchdown and the Vikings first points of the game. Ponder finished 20 of 27 for 270 yards and a 105.5 passer rating. But his performance on that final drive of regulation, which included two completions in the final 20 seconds to set up the game-tying field goal, was where he really stood out.

“I told our team that we need to be ready for the two minute offense," Ponder said. "We need to stay in the game and be prepared mentally. We did and we executed.”

[vikeinmontana]

agree completely. some people act like football is so easy and every player out there should look like joe montana, barry sanders, lawrence taylor etc. or they "suck". it's very possible that ponder won't be a hall of famer but that doesn't mean he's worthless and can't be a franchise qb.

bottom line is EVERY win in the nfl is hard to get. you have to prepare for the browns the same way you prepare for the pats. throughout the season you'll lose games you should have won and win games you should have lost. in the end none of that matters. all that matters is you win games. doesn't matter if it was by 3 against a "bad" team or if you blow out the cowboys. they all equal one win.

[mosscarter]

the fact is, he completed 17-20 passes for 230+ yds after starting slow. that second half was impressive, and he showed plenty of poise. the problem is the defense didn't show up at all, and at best this is still a 6 or 7 win team. maybe all ponder needs is a little confidence, but that would come if the team played better as a whole. once again another game with no sacks or interceptions. if the defense plays like that how can you expect much of anything from the offense?

[Mothman]

the fact is, he completed 17-20 passes for 230+ yds after starting slow. that second half was impressive, and he showed plenty of poise. the problem is the defense didn't show up at all, and at best this is still a 6 or 7 win team. maybe all ponder needs is a little confidence, but that would come if the team played better as a whole. once again another game with no sacks or interceptions. if the defense plays like that how can you expect much of anything from the offense?

They had two sacks against Jacksonville and they could still be anything from a 3 win team to an 8 or 9 win team. One game doesn't define a team for the season. The defense can improve and hopefully, they will. With Allen, Williams, and Robison on that front line and at least a few good blitzers behind them, I don't think we have to worry about the Vikings getting a decent, perhaps even excellent, number of sacks this season. With the exception of Winfield, the secondary is extremely inexperienced but hopefully, the LBs and secondary will start coming down with INTs as they play together more and gain experience as a unit. Until they do, it can definitely be considered a problem.

The defense had issues on Sunday. They struggled to get off the field on third downs, they allowed too many long, time-consuming drives and they gave up a drive and TD near the end of regulation that simply should not have been allowed. However, they did some good things too. They applied pressure on Gabbert and they defended some passes and didn't just make tackles after catches. They had a few nice defensive stands (one after Ponder's fumble and one early in the game after a long Jags drive) to limit the Jaguars to field goals. They left a LOT of room for improvement but they allowed a relatively low average per play so if they can do better on third downs and actually get off the field, that bodes well.

[Cliff]

They had two sacks against Jacksonville and they could still be anything from a 3 win team to an 8 or 9 win team. One game doesn't define a team for the season. The defense can improve and hopefully, they will. With Allen, Williams, and Robison on that front line and at least a few good blitzers behind them, I don't think we have to worry about the Vikings getting a decent, perhaps even excellent, number of sacks this season. With the exception of Winfield, the secondary is extremely inexperienced but hopefully, the LBs and secondary will start coming down with INTs as they play together more and gain experience as a unit. Until they do, it can definitely be considered a problem.

The defense had issues on Sunday. They struggled to get off the field on third downs, they allowed too many long, time-consuming drives and they gave up a drive and TD near the end of regulation that simply should not have been allowed. However, they did some good things too. They applied pressure on Gabbert and they defended some passes and didn't just make tackles after catches. They had a few nice defensive stands (one after Ponder's fumble and one early in the game after a long Jags drive) to limit the Jaguars to field goals. They left a LOT of room for improvement but they allowed a relatively low average per play so if they can do better on third downs and actually get off the field, that bodes well.

I was thinking the same things, Jim. I would also point out that in addition to the defense shooting themselves in the foot a little bit by giving up 3rd down conversions the offense also didn't do them any favors by going 3-and-out so much early in the game. That extended playing time can wear out a defense.

The defense also stepped up when it was dire that they do so at the end of the game. You have to remember, with the new overtime rules Walsh's FG in overtime didn't end the game. The defense's stop after that did.

[Purple bruise]

Why do you make comparison's in every post?

Well I like Coffee Cakes but I think Yodels are better.


Ponder's performance is irrevelant to RG3, Peyton Manning, Gabbert, Tebow, whoever.

Ponder looked really bad at times and really good at others Sunday. We gotta hope he tilts the scale more towards the good times as the season progresses. Griffin played an amazing game, but it has nothing to do with how good or bad Ponder played and never will.

It's not even like the Vikes had a choice between Ponder and Griffin and chose Ponder, if that was the case then comparing them would make some sense at least like "This is what Player A is doing and this what the alternative we passed on at the time is doing"

Man thank you for that. MY point was that I agree that RG3, in his first game, did seem to be more poised than Ponder BUT what was the purpose for Hibbs comparison between the two. Then I commented that Manning was another QB that is more poised than Ponder but again so what?

[Mothman]

I was thinking the same things, Jim. I would also point out that in addition to the defense shooting themselves in the foot a little bit by giving up 3rd down conversions the offense also didn't do them any favors by going 3-and-out so much early in the game. That extended playing time can wear out a defense.

It can, and that's a good point, although I wonder if the defense themselves deserve quite a bit of the blame for that. Their inability to get off the field might have contributed in some small way to the offense's struggle to get going. For example, after picking up a first down on the opening possession and then going nowhere, the Vikings offense hit the bench at the 12:24 mark of the first quarter. They wouldn't see the field again until the 2.46 mark. The defense allowed a 9:22 drive right out of the gate. That may have led to the offense getting a little cold on the sidelines (or maybe that's just over-analysis on my part). Anyway, the offense didn't help matters by going three and out on their second possession and putting the defense right back on the field. They forced a three and out that time but the Vikes offense followed that with one of their own and then the defense was back to give up another time-consuming drive (7:09). Neither unit was giving the other much help early in the game!

The defense also stepped up when it was dire that they do so at the end of the game. You have to remember, with the new overtime rules Walsh's FG in overtime didn't end the game. The defense's stop after that did.

Exactly.

A funny thing about that OT... I was listening to the radio broadcast and watching key plays on RedZone. As the overtime began, a pal of mine called so I had the sound down on everything and was just watching on RedZone. When Walsh hit the FG in overtime, I yelled, "Vikes win!" to my friend on the phone. A few minutes later, I was watching Jacksonville with the ball and I realized the stupid new OT rules were in play. I hate that new rule...

[Just Me]

I was thinking the same things, Jim. I would also point out that in addition to the defense shooting themselves in the foot a little bit by giving up 3rd down conversions the offense also didn't do them any favors by going 3-and-out so much early in the game. That extended playing time can wear out a defense.

The defense also stepped up when it was dire that they do so at the end of the game. You have to remember, with the new overtime rules Walsh's FG in overtime didn't end the game. The defense's stop after that did.

That's a good point, and I had neglected to acknowledge that. I guess in that respect, it was a team victory (as almost all are).

[Just Me]

A funny thing about that OT... I was listening to the radio broadcast and watching key plays on RedZone. As the overtime began, a pal of mine called so I had the sound down on everything and was just watching on RedZone. When Walsh hit the FG in overtime, I yelled, "Vikes win!" to my friend on the phone. A few minutes later, I was watching Jacksonville with the ball and I realized the stupid new OT rules were in play. I hate that new rule...

Kind of ironic we were the reason it exists, huh? (I had actually forgotten that too, initially). I was thinking to myself after realizing the new rule changed things a bit: Wouldn't it be better to defer the kick to the other side? (The rationale being that you know you need either a FG or TD to win if the other team happens to score on their drive.)

[Purple bruise]

Kind of ironic we were the reason it exists, huh? (I had actually forgotten that too, initially). I was thinking to myself after realizing the new rule changed things a bit: Wouldn't it be better to defer the kick to the other side? (The rationale being that you know you need either a FG or TD to win if the other team happens to score on their drive.)

No they took the wind. The Airconditioning in the dome was blowing north to south.

[S197]

Kind of ironic we were the reason it exists, huh? (I had actually forgotten that too, initially). I was thinking to myself after realizing the new rule changed things a bit: Wouldn't it be better to defer the kick to the other side? (The rationale being that you know you need either a FG or TD to win if the other team happens to score on their drive.)

No, because if the team with first possession scores a TD the game is over. It's only if the team with first possession scores via field goal does the opposing team have the chance to score.

[Just Me]

No, because if the team with first possession scores a TD the game is over. It's only if the team with first possession scores via field goal does the opposing team have the chance to score.

Ahhh thanks! That makes sense, now...

[Mothman]

Kind of ironic we were the reason it exists, huh?

Do you mean because of the Saints/Vikes NFCC game? I guess that was sort of the clincher, wasn't?

Peter King referred to the Vikes/Jaguars game as the "first fair overtime game" ever played in his MMQB column this week. I still think that's BS but King was a huge proponent of this rule change.

[vikeinmontana]

i actually really like the new rule. you score a td it's over. however, you win the toss and have a big return kicking a chipshot no longer promises a win. we could all go back and forth forever about it but i simply like the idea it makes a coin toss just a little less important.