Matt Cassel

[dead_poet]

I'm hard-pressed to think of a decision the Vikings could make that would alienate me more than signing Vick.

Brett Favre?

[Mothman]

Has anyone given much thought to how smart this contract was for Cassel and just how well he played Spielman?

No, because I don't think he "played' Spielman at all. How did he play Spielman in this scenario? The Vikings and Cassel both had an option to opt out of the contract after one year. That was a mutually beneficial option. Spielman needed a veteran backup behind Ponder last year and he got one. Cassel needed an opportunity and the Vikings gave him one. I fail to see how anybody was "played'.

He was brought in to be a backup to Ponder, and was being paid backup QB money, but he made sure that he had an option on the second year. He said all the right things, but clearly saw the probability of starting at some point over a QB that everyone knew was a train wreck. And that's exactly what happened.

Yep... I'm sure Spielman saw the possibility that Cassel could end up starting too. That's undoubtedly why he signed him.

Now, he'll capitalize on the gamble, possibly right back with the Vikings. The very worst that he can do is earn comparable money as a backup QB for another team.

Which wouldn't exactly be "capitalizing", would it? It's also not the worst he could do. He could end up with another one year deal that actually pays him less and doesn't come with an option for a second year.

[Eli]

No, because I don't think he "played' Spielman at all. How did he play Spielman in this scenario? The Vikings and Cassel both had an option to opt out of the contract after one year.

The Vikings didn't negotiate an option. They can release any player under contract. An option year is only an advantage for the player.

That was a mutually beneficial option. Spielman needed a veteran backup behind Ponder last year and he got one. Cassel needed an opportunity and the Vikings gave him one. I fail to see how anybody was "played'.

With the party line before the season of how Cassel was clearly a backup to the anointed starter, I'm sure that was exactly how Spielman saw him. A backup QB role is seldom an opportunity unless the player has little chance of being a starter anywhere. The situation could only be seen as an opportunity for someone who thinks he may play after the starter craps out.

Yep... I'm sure Spielman saw the possibility that Cassel could end up starting too. That's undoubtedly why he signed him.

And yet it's clear now that it was Spielman who pushed so hard to keep Ponder starting while it was clear that he was failing miserably to keep it together.

Which wouldn't exactly be "capitalizing", would it? It's also not the worst he could do. He could end up with another one year deal that actually pays him less and doesn't come with an option for a second year.

Of course he's capitalizing on the deal, by opting out after a pretty good showing. If he re-signs with the Vikings then he'll have worked Spielman. Or, if he signs on elsewhere for more money, he also wins. If he goes elsewhere for comparable money, he's no worse for the wear and gets clear of a franchise that's in turmoil. It's unlikely he'll be paid any less.

[Mothman]

The Vikings didn't negotiate an option. They can release any player under contract. An option year is only an advantage for the player.

I understand that. I just wasn't specific enough. What I was getting at is the Vikings structured the contract in such a way that they could release Cassel before March 7th this year and save a $500,000 roster bonus that would have been due to him at that time. They structured the deal in a way that was favorable to both parties so that if they had wanted to cut Cassel, they wouldn't have owed him any more than what they paid him last season.

With the party line before the season of how Cassel was clearly a backup to the anointed starter, I'm sure that was exactly how Spielman saw him. A backup QB role is seldom an opportunity unless the player has little chance of being a starter anywhere. The situation could only be seen as an opportunity for someone who thinks he may play after the starter craps out.

... or after the starter gets injured, as Ponder did in each of his two seasons. I think both Spielman and Cassel probably recognized there was a good chance Cassel could start some games in 2013.

Of course he's capitalizing on the deal, by opting out after a pretty good showing. If he re-signs with the Vikings then he'll have worked Spielman.

Again, how? How is Spielman getting "worked" or "played" here?

You seem determined to assume some sort of naiveté or incompetence on Spielman's part in this situation when there's absolutely no indication that anything has occurred that he wasn't prepared, and perfectly willing, to accept. He was obviously willing to give Cassel the option to opt out of his deal after one year so presumably, he was okay with that deal and he certainly must have been prepared for the possibility that Cassel would actually exercise the option. I see no indication that anybody was worked or played at all. Spielman gave Cassel an opportunity he needed. Cassel took the opportunity. It seems to me that everybody got what they signed up for in this situation. It's not as if Cassel somehow took advantage of the Vikings, proved himself to be one of the league's top QBs and is now in line for a 5 year, $20 million deal.

Or, if he signs on elsewhere for more money, he also wins. If he goes elsewhere for comparable money, he's no worse for the wear and gets clear of a franchise that's in turmoil.

... or he ends up with another franchise with problems. In fact, if he wants to sign somewhere as a starter, that might be a pretty likely outcome (assuming anyone will sign him as a starter).

Cassel wisely gave himself the opportunity to seek a new contract if he wanted to do so but it doesn't follow that he somehow took advantage of Spielman.

[Eli]

Spielman's incompetence came in the form of his misjudgment and overconfidence in Ponder. Obviously, Spielman thought the Vikings only needed Cassel as a short-term contingency plan. Maybe he failed to look ahead even one season, or maybe he was desperate to get Cassle (or anyone) signed and conceded the option year.

[Mothman]

Spielman's incompetence came in the form of his misjudgment and overconfidence in Ponder. Obviously, Spielman thought the Vikings only needed Cassel as a short-term contingency plan. Maybe he failed to look ahead even one season, or maybe he was desperate to get Cassle (or anyone) signed and conceded the option year.

... or maybe he was smart enough not to commit to Cassel for longer than that since Cassel was coming off a couple of lousy seasons that led to his released from KC.

I doubt Spielman failed to look ahead even one season. There was no reason to commit to Cassel for longer than that. He was a short-term contingency plan and he did nothing last year to suggest he'd be more than a short-term contingency plan going forward

There's also nothing to suggest Spielman was played or taken advantage of in any way.

[dead_poet]

while Cassel is no Joe Willie, sports article after sports article definitely say Cassel did have a good year.

That statement is heavily dependent on how you define "good year." Compared to the performance of rest of the guys on the roster? Perhaps marginally the best (I still maintain he didn't perform leaps and bounds better than Ponder). His performance (by my assessment) would still put him at the bottom tier of quarterbacks in 2013.

If I could take the time, I'm sure I could find more mainstream sources, I've read a variety of articles and can find them later.

I'd be very curious to see how those would justify Cassel's "good year."

Just the fact that Cassel can shop himself around speaks volumes IF he is even doing that, he may just be trying to improve on his contract and it could be argued the Vikings did not treat him that well.

Probably trying to improve his contract. Heck, he might end up back with the Vikings for the same (or less?). He's betting on himself and the market. It's probably a good move, but could backfire.

In all likelihood, if the situation was reversed and Ponder could go FA, I doubt if he'd be stirring up much interest.

Probably not, but he has youth on his side. Again, if Tarvaris Jackson can latch on somewhere, so could Christian Ponder. It's not like he was much worse (if at all)

Cassel has done well I believe and often in times where he was just thrown in there.

I wouldn't say he's done all that well (again, a case could be made that, compared to Ponder, he did "well") and we need to stop talking about him like he's some kind of answer. We deserve better and require better at the quarterback position if we want any chance at getting to -- and advancing in -- the playoffs.

[Mothman]

In spite of your assessment, while Cassel is no Joe Willie, sports article after sports article definitely say Cassel did have a good year. If I could take the time, I'm sure I could find more mainstream sources, I've read a variety of articles and can find them later.

I've read quite a few articles that said he was the best of the Vikings QBs in 2013 but that doesn't necessarily equate to having a good year. By overall NFL starting QB standards, I don't think Cassel had a good year. He had some good games but that's not the same thing.

Just the fact that Cassel can shop himself around speaks volumes IF he is even doing that, he may just be trying to improve on his contract and it could be argued the Vikings did not treat him that well.

In all likelihood, if the situation was reversed and Ponder could go FA, I doubt if he'd be stirring up much interest.

We don't know if Cassel will stir up much interest either. I suspect either one of them would draw interest on the open market as a backup.

[dead_poet]

Russel Wilson hardly did anything in the first half of the Superbowl, one can check the stats, it wasn't until the game was starting to get out of hand, he put together some good passes.

Except play turnover-free football and extend drives with key third-down passes.

Youth is out the window, if you don't have someone being competent, you can be 19 but you aren't going to win.

Youth is not "out the window." It doesn't have to be one or the other. You can be a good, young quarterback. "Young" QBs win all the time.

I don't go with those who want to start from square one with an unproven quarterback and waste 3 more years. If Vikings Mgt. had given Cassel the time of day, we might have had even more victories.

If the defense would've played better, they would've had more victories with Ponder too (not that Ponder didn't have his share of bonehead decisions in those loses). But I think we all want the same thing: talent. I don't necessarily care if that's a 20-year-old or 35 year-old except that I want competent quarterback play and stability at the position. Sorry. This QB carousel is just so tiresome. I want someone here that can be "the guy" for 10+ seasons.

Sure, he doesn't compare to Favre, the Superbowl Champions are showing you don't need Joe Montana in there, 2 straight years where the defenses played heavily in winning the Superbowl.

Russell Wilson is so much better at this point already than Cassel it's disgusting. Defenses play a role, absolutely. But so do offenses. It's a team sport.

Again, I'll go with general perception on this situation and sportswriters who say "in a general way" Cassel did well.

Ok. I disagree.

Be my guest though, I will support the team through more 5-10-1 and 3-13 seasons if one wants to constantly start from scratch looking for the ideal franchise QB.

It's just as certain the team will go 5-10-1 and 3-13 with the wrong guy (it doesn't matter if "the wrong guy" is 20 or 40), especially if they don't shore up the defense and play better overall from coaching down to player execution.

[Mothman]

Be my guest though, I will support the team through more 5-10-1 and 3-13 seasons if one wants to constantly start from scratch looking for the ideal franchise QB.

How about just a franchise QB? He doesn't have to be ideal but they can do better than Cassel, who is just marginally better than Ponder and Ponder's name is tossed around here like it's a four-letter word. Incidentally, they won 10 games in 2012 with Ponder at QB. If they were able to do that with a QB so many fans view as incompetent, and with a coaching staff many fans also viewed that way, why would starting from scratch with a young QB necessarily yield more 5-10-1 and 3-13 seasons? Why would it "waste 3 more years"? Seattle just won the Super Bowl with a second year QB and it was the second year in a row that the NFC was represented by a team starting a second year QB.

There's much, MUCH more to winning and losing than just QB performance. It definitely matters but even with QBs who were in the bottom third of the league as passers last season, the Vikings still had a legitimate opportunity to finish with a winning record and if they hadn't had one of the worst defenses in the league, they might have been able to get back to the playoffs.

It's past time to stop acting like Cassel is some sort of essential ingredient to success for the 2014 Vikings just because he provided some relief to fans who couldn't stand another moment of Ponder. He's a low-end NFL starter. As dead_poet wrote above, as fans we deserve better and the Vikings need to do better. That doesn't mean Cassel isn't worth bringing back but the team's success or failure in 2014 isn't riding on his presence.

If the Vikings do a good job of team-building, drafting and developing a QB won't doom them to seasons where they finish 3+ games under .500.

[dead_poet]

Ponder and Freeman are "young", that got us practically nothing at all this year. The supposed older guy got more victories than the other 2 combined. Suit yourself, I don't want to wait until the 2020s to see the Vikings win.

Please. How did McNabb do for us again? Was he old enough for you? Age does not correlate to winning. Cassel may have been the better Vikings quarterback in 2013, but that really doesn't have to do with his age as much as his "talent" (such that it is) or, perhaps more accurately, lack of talent by the other two (or one, and lack of dedication and understanding by the other).

Again, I don't care what the age is of our starter as long as he's an asset and contributing to winning. I ideally would like a guy in his early/mid 20s because, as I mentioned, I want stability at the position. I'd prefer not to trot out 35-40 year-old guys that might be good for a year or so when they're not nursing injuries and we have to, again, keep searching for another quarterback year after year due to the "old guy" either being ineffective, injured or disinterested in returning.

I don't want to wait either, but I also want sustained, long-term success over a possible (improbable) run like 2009 with a HALL OF FAME QUARTERBACK. There's a bit of a difference between "old man Brett Favre" and "old man Matt Cassel").

[Laserman]

PLEASE PLEASE, not another year of Ponder. I may have to bail for awhile if they start Ponder. I can't take another year of him at QB.

[DanAS]

K...

I will never bail as a fan. But I am almost to the point where I would rather the team lose without Ponder than win with him. I have nothing against the guy personally, but I can't bear watching him QB this team. He symbolizes to me the futility of these past few seasons.

[frosted]

I will never bail as a fan. But I am almost to the point where I would rather the team lose without Ponder than win with him. I have nothing against the guy personally, but I can't bear watching him QB this team. He symbolizes to me the futility of these past few seasons.

Really?

Really?



.........


Really?

..

REALLY?

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

[Purple Reign]

I will never bail as a fan. But I am almost to the point where I would rather the team lose without Ponder than win with him. I have nothing against the guy personally, but I can't bear watching him QB this team. He symbolizes to me the futility of these past few seasons.

And you claim you don't have anything against the guy personally? I thought the whole goal of sports was to win - so if the team is winning with Ponder then why would you be against that and rather lose with someone else? The only reason that I can think of for that kind of reasoning is that you just don't want Ponder playing, regardless whether they are winning or not, and that would be personal IMO. I just can't quite wrap my mind around that logic.