Vikings Message Board.Com

Maybe I'm crazy here. Jared Allen has been one of my favorite Vikings for years. And yes, I love to see sacks -- just love 'em, which is one reason I was so happy to see Randle and Doleman make the Hall in recent years. But if Allen doesn't get that same privilege, I'm not sure I'll cry foul. And here's why.

Yesterday, for the first time, I was wondering if he's a complete player at his position or just a sack guy. I'm watching the Colts run a successful reverse to Allen's side of the field because they know he's going to sell out to get the sack. And I'm watching Allen go so crazy for the sack when Luck is scrambling toward the sidelines that Allen nails him three yards out of bounds. That 15 yard penalty may have cost us the game, if I recall correctly, and I'm not sure Allen makes that stupid penalty if he is playing under control rather than smelling sacks like a bloodhound smells blood.

Clearly, Allen is a very good player, I'm not trying to debate that. And yes, I did notice him bat down a ball yesterday at the line of scrimmage when he knew that a sack wasn't available. But the issue here isn't whether the Vikes want Allen on their team, but whether he belongs in the same category as Randle, Doleman and the other Canton pass rushers. Gastineau was a great sacker too, and he's not in the Hall. The difference for me is that the Canton guys are complete players who get their sacks but don't hurt their team when the sacks aren't coming. And yesterday, Allen was exposed on multiple occasions as a notch below them. Maybe it was just a bad game for him, but I'm starting to wonder about it. I'd like him to talk a little less about his stupid sack stats and a little more about the team winning. And by the way, that sack they took away from him in week one was a good call -- he did jump offsides. If he wants to get off the ball within a nanosecond of the snap, he needs to line up further back of the line and cut himself a little margin of error, because that time he was early.

Changing topics from Jared, I had to say that as much as I have loved Andrew Luck since I first saw him at Stanford and noticed how much he was changing the fate of my college's program (heck of a win on Saturday night!), it made me sick to see him and his team of nobodies beat the Vikes yesterday. They had a patchwork offensive line, no running game, and they still won -- and deserved to win. Take away that fluke of a TD on the double deflection and perhaps we don't even get close yesterday. How depressing.

And speaking of depressing, I cracked up listening to Billick make excuses for Ponder and the Vikes. "Game manager"? Please. Ponder may be a fine second string QB. And he may even be a minimally adequate starter if you've got, say, the 85 Bears defense or the defense that Billick's Ravens had the year they won the Super Bowl. But the Vikes D isn't even in the same league as those guys and nor is Ponder in the same league as the QBs who affirmatively help to win Super Bowls. The "much improved" Ponder -- and I would agree that he is much improved still was thoroughly outplayed by a guy in his second game. The Vikes offensive coordinator lacks confidence in Ponder to throw the ball downfield. And from what I've seen, I can't totally blame the coordinator. The guy doesn't stand up in the pocket and make good decisions. And he's not God's gift to accuracy or arm strength either. (But other than that, Ms. Lincoln, how did you like the play ...) Ponder also ran the world's worst hurry up offense during the middle of the fourth quarter, but this time I'm not sure it's his fault -- we did, after all, see him rally the team with urgency at the end of the Jacksonville game. Still, whoever was at fault, I agree with the other announcer who kept repeating over and over again that the Vikes were taking too much time with a 14 point deficit. It just didn't look like a Big League team.

Also, I realize that AD isn't 100%, but it still was odd to see him so ineffective against a D that was supposed to stink. In part, I blame the offensive coordinator for the failure to throw the ball to him out of the backfield until there was less than two minutes in the game. Watching the Vikes O always seems like a triple A team these days except for that one year when Favre was around. Now THERE was a QB.

But all is not lost, Vikings fans. Because we do have a kicker with a big leg. A BIG leg. Also, I like the tight end we drafted out of Notre Dame. And #12 is a freak of nature ... just like #28. In the end though, this is a team that lacks talent throughout most of the defense and at the QB position. Add in a mediocre OL (Johnson alone will prevent this line from being called good) and a tough division, and times figure to be tough for a while.

But hey, there's always the Twins, right?

I don't want to end this rant on such a sad note. At least we're getting a new stadium. And this is a league where fortunes can change quicker than people think. Plus, we all know that 11 years from our debacle in New Orleans, we'll be back in the NFC Championship Game with a legitimate chance to win it. We still have to suffer for a few more years first, apparently, but it's just a matter of time. Who knows -- maybe when we're really, really, really old, and all our old friends have long since died, people will ask us what motivates us to keep fighting and we'll tell them: "We're waiting for that first Vikings Super Bowl win!" See, every cloud has a silver lining.

DanAS wrote:And speaking of depressing, I cracked up listening to Billick make excuses for Ponder and the Vikes. "Game manager"? Please. Ponder may be a fine second string QB. And he may even be a minimally adequate starter if you've got, say, the 85 Bears defense or the defense that Billick's Ravens had the year they won the Super Bowl. But the Vikes D isn't even in the same league as those guys and nor is Ponder in the same league as the QBs who affirmatively help to win Super Bowls. The "much improved" Ponder -- and I would agree that he is much improved still was thoroughly outplayed by a guy in his second game. The Vikes offensive coordinator lacks confidence in Ponder to throw the ball downfield. And from what I've seen, I can't totally blame the coordinator. The guy doesn't stand up in the pocket and make good decisions. And he's not God's gift to accuracy or arm strength either. (But other than that, Ms. Lincoln, how did you like the play ...) Ponder also ran the world's worst hurry up offense during the middle of the fourth quarter, but this time I'm not sure it's his fault -- we did, after all, see him rally the team with urgency at the end of the Jacksonville game. Still, whoever was at fault, I agree with the other announcer who kept repeating over and over again that the Vikes were taking too much time with a 14 point deficit. It just didn't look like a Big League team.

Also, I realize that AD isn't 100%, but it still was odd to see him so ineffective against a D that was supposed to stink. In part, I blame the offensive coordinator for the failure to throw the ball to him out of the backfield until there was less than two minutes in the game. Watching the Vikes O always seems like a triple A team these days except for that one year when Favre was around. Now THERE was a QB.

... and if the Vikings had him in his second season as a starter, a season in which he threw 19 TDs, 24 INTs and was sacked 30 times, I guarantee this understandably frustrated, impatient fan base would be ripping him to shreds, wishing for the latest #1 or #2 pick at QB from some other team or expecting Favre to play at a level beyond his years.

The level of urgency in the 4th quarter offense in yesterday's game was fine. The team got the 2 TDs they needed with time to spare.

As for Ponder... I don't think Musgrave lacks confidence in him throwing downfield. He's had him do it and Ponder has shown he can do it. It's far more likely that Musgrave lacks confidence in Ponder's potential downfield targets. The Vikes concern about who would fill that role while Simpson was suspended was well-documented this summer. Musgrave and Ponder were probably responding to the Colts efforts to take away the deep ball by throwing underneath the coverage rather than trying to challenge it with receivers who (other than Harvin) deserve to be described as "minimally adequate" starters much more than Ponder does.

The Vikings need more playmakers. No amount of coaching or QB play is going to make up for that problem. Whether those playmakers emerge from the current roster or are added after this season (hopefully both), that's what it will take for the team to compete at a higher level. Coaching matters but players play the games and they need to play smart and win their matchups all over the field. If enough fail to do that, you get a performance like the Vikes delivered yesterday.

Mothman wrote:
The level of urgency in the 4th quarter offense in yesterday's game was fine. The team got the 2 TDs they needed with time to spare.

As for Ponder... I don't think Musgrave lacks confidence in him throwing downfield. He's had him do it and Ponder has shown he can do it. It's far more likely that Musgrave lacks confidence in Ponder's potential downfield targets. The Vikes concern about who would fill that role while Simpson was suspended was well-documented this summer. Musgrave and Ponder were probably responding to the Colts efforts to take away the deep ball by throwing underneath the coverage rather than trying to challenge it with receivers who (other than Harvin) deserve to be described as "minimally adequate" starters much more than Ponder does.

The Vikings need more playmakers. No amount of coaching or QB play is going to make up for that problem. Whether those playmakers emerge from the current roster or are added after this season (hopefully both), that's what it will take for the team to compete at a higher level. Coaching matters but players play the games and they need to play smart and win their matchups all over the field. If enough fail to do that, you get a performance like the Vikes delivered yesterday.

Regarding the level of urgency, the Vikes gave themselves no margin for error. They would have time for two and only two possessions and needed TDs in both. Did they get them? Sure. But the first of the two TDs was a complete fluke -- a pass that was deflected over the middle, not once but twice. On fourth down, if I'm not mistaken.

As for the fact that Ponder lacks playmakers, I don't doubt that. But I haven't been terribly impressed with his play notwithstanding that fact. Luck doesn't exactly have studs either, and he is even less experienced at the pro level, but he has special talent. I've never been wowed by Ponder's.

Clearly, the biggest problem with this team is the talent, not the coaching. We agree on that. But we should be able to beat the really bad teams with the talent we have, assuming we don't commit bonehead penalties like we did yesterday on multiple occasions. I read elsewhere that Allen is not only complaining about the call on the off-sides penalty from last week but is complaining about the personal foul he got this week. That penalty was also well deserved. No, it wasn't a particularly hard hit, but it was way out of bounds and he hit a QB. That will generally draw a flag.

DanAS wrote:Regarding the level of urgency, the Vikes gave themselves no margin for error. They would have time for two and only two possessions and needed TDs in both. Did they get them? Sure. But the first of the two TDs was a complete fluke -- a pass that was deflected over the middle, not once but twice. On fourth down, if I'm not mistaken.

You're not mistaken.

I think it's a matter of choices. They gave themselves no margin for error but lucky or not, they put together two drives and accomplished their goal. In that situation, there's more than one way to play it.

As for the fact that Ponder lacks playmakers, I don't doubt that. But I haven't been terribly impressed with his play notwithstanding that fact. Luck doesn't exactly have studs either, and he is even less experienced at the pro level, but he has special talent. I've never been wowed by Ponder's.

Ponder has made some throws that "wowed" me but I don't think he's going to wow anyone with sheer physical ability. His arm strength is average. He's a good athlete but not "RG3 good". He's not the first-pick-in-the-draft prospect Luck is either but he has the tools to succeed. Montana didn't wow anybody with physical attributes either. Ultimately, what made him a great QB was his mind, his leadership and the skill set he developed. Ponder has a chance to be that kind of QB (ie: a smart, efficient playmaker). I doubt he'll become the QB Montana was but I have no doubt he can be good. I just hope he will be...

Clearly, the biggest problem with this team is the talent, not the coaching. We agree on that. But we should be able to beat the really bad teams with the talent we have, assuming we don't commit bonehead penalties like we did yesterday on multiple occasions.

I agree, although we are one of the really bad teams if we're basing that assessment on last year's records. I'm not sure who the really bad teams will be this season, although the Chiefs are looking more and more like a safe bet. The Colts are probably a safe bet too but they're a very different team than they were last year so who knows? The Vikes definitely self-destructed yesterday. Penalties and mental mistakes absolutely killed them.

I read elsewhere that Allen is not only complaining about the call on the off-sides penalty from last week but is complaining about the personal foul he got this week. That penalty was also well deserved. No, it wasn't a particularly hard hit, but it was way out of bounds and he hit a QB. That will generally draw a flag.

Yes, and it should. It was a really stupid penalty and hopefully, Allen will shut up about it once he sees it on film because it wasn't even close.

BTW, it's good to see you posting again!

i saw several games yesterday where players were hit/tackled out of bounds much later than allen's tackle on luck and no penalty was called. a dumb tackle one way or another, but his feet were still in bounds.

sorry i have to laugh at "a fine second string qb" in reference to ponder. do you even pay attention to the rest of the qbs in the nfl?

In a certain way, the Vikings reminded me of the Dan Reeves coached Broncos when they first had a young Elway. They would play ultra conservative for 3Q and then realize they needed to win, which would unleash Elway.

What I do not get is why we didn't open up the passing attack sooner. The underwhelming DL play is another stumper.

mansquatch wrote:In a certain way, the Vikings reminded me of the Dan Reeves coached Broncos when they first had a young Elway. They would play ultra conservative for 3Q and then realize they needed to win, which would unleash Elway.

What I do not get is why we didn't open up the passing attack sooner.

Ponder said the Colts were playing cover 2 for a good portion of the game. If that's the case, the Vikings were probably attacking underneath it because that can be effective and, if it's effective enough, it can force the defense out of that deeper coverage and open things up downfield.

Jim

Should have traded him this offseason.

Mothman wrote:
BTW, it's good to see you posting again!

I've been too busy to post much lately -- trying to finish a draft of book number 3, while holding down a full time law job and coordinating two community organizations, plus blogging every week. My life has been nuts, Jim. But I've watched both games and I still have the NFL Sunday Ticket. So I'm keeping up with them, as painful as that prospect can be.

Obviously, Ponder can improve, and I agree that you don't need perfect arm strength. But if you don't have such arm strength, and maybe even if you do, a QB needs great accuracy to be elite. That's what Montana had -- that and a great supporting cast. I'm not sold on Ponder having that great accuracy, and I am sure he doesn't have a great supporting cast. Hopefully, that supporting cast can at least be improved once we get that new receiver in the lineup.

smoothoperator wrote:i saw several games yesterday where players were hit/tackled out of bounds much later than allen's tackle on luck and no penalty was called. a dumb tackle one way or another, but his feet were still in bounds.

sorry i have to laugh at "a fine second string qb" in reference to ponder. do you even pay attention to the rest of the qbs in the nfl?

Sure. I also pay attention to the guys that are playing in the playoffs year after year, and I'm not sold on Ponder being in that league even after another year or two. If your point is that there aren't 32 better QBs in the league, I'm not arguing. A "fine second string QB" doesn't mean the guy isn't in the top 32 at his position. It means that if you're a championship contender and you've got him on your team, he's second string. And after nearly 5 decades of watching this team, my goal is not for them to develop into a mediocre or even a marginally good team. I need them to assemble the building blocks to become a championship contender.

Mothman wrote:Ponder has made some throws that "wowed" me but I don't think he's going to wow anyone with sheer physical ability. His arm strength is average. He's a good athlete but not "RG3 good". He's not the first-pick-in-the-draft prospect Luck is either but he has the tools to succeed. Montana didn't wow anybody with physical attributes either. Ultimately, what made him a great QB was his mind, his leadership and the skill set he developed. Ponder has a chance to be that kind of QB (ie: a smart, efficient playmaker). I doubt he'll become the QB Montana was but I have no doubt he can be good. I just hope he will be...

I agree wit this. We don't need him to be a Joe Montana... Just be smart and lead the team down the field.

I've been a big fan and proponent of the all-around play of Jared Allen. Yes, all-around play. Defensive ends just aren't going to make 100 tackles a year. Half the plays are run the other way. He's dropped back into coverage on zone blitzes and made interceptions. He's played well for the most part in the running game. And he's of course made sacks.

But with that being said, I thought his actions yesterday were inexcusable.

The hit out of bounds ... c'mon sports fans. That was clearly a penalty. You can't do that, you certainly can't do that to a quarterback, and you especially can't do that and then turn around to whine to the officials. We gave the Colts new life with a roughing the kicker penalty ... I can't find fault with an aggressive attempt to block a kick and make a play. But then Allen, in the same drive, gave the Colts new life again with his egregious blunder. He had the look of a guy who was frustrated and worried about his sack stats -- and the fact that he didn't have any yet.

I'm still a fan. But I'm pretty disappointed in my guy right now. You're a veteran and an all-pro, Mr. Allen. How about you play like it?

And after nearly 5 decades of watching this team, my goal is not for them to develop into a mediocre or even a marginally good team. I need them to assemble the building blocks to become a championship contender.

Preach it Brother!

I have no doubt he can be good.

None at all? Wow...

DanAS wrote: I've been too busy to post much lately -- trying to finish a draft of book number 3, while holding down a full time law job and coordinating two community organizations, plus blogging every week. My life has been nuts, Jim.

It sounds like it's been a good kind of "nuts". I can't believe you're already on book #3! You have my utmost respect for that. It takes real discipline to write.

Obviously, Ponder can improve, and I agree that you don't need perfect arm strength. But if you don't have such arm strength, and maybe even if you do, a QB needs great accuracy to be elite. That's what Montana had -- that and a great supporting cast. I'm not sold on Ponder having that great accuracy, and I am sure he doesn't have a great supporting cast. Hopefully, that supporting cast can at least be improved once we get that new receiver in the lineup.

I hope so.

I agree with you about the importance of accuracy and one of the real improvements I see in Ponder this year is his accuracy. To me, it seems like he's placing the ball much better this year and I find it encouraging. He's throwing a lot of passes that give his receivers the chance to catch the ball in stride and gain yards after the catch and most of his downfield throws have been placed well. If he can keep improving in that department, I think he has a chance to be very good.

Demi wrote: None at all? Wow...

I have no doubt he can be good, not no doubt he will be good. There's a difference.