NFL Forum :: - Joe Webb - QB only in 2012

Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

FAQ Register Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

FootballsFuture.com Home

Joe Webb - QB only in 2012
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 6, 7, 8 ... 10, 11, 12 Next

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Kellerman

Joined: 16 May 2010
Posts: 3195
Location: Amsterdam

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 10:28 am Post subject:

milanb wrote:

Purplexing wrote:

Arguing aggressively that one has proven their value and merit AT THIS POINT is futile.

Agreed, but the latest "exchange of ideas", for lack of a better term, was precipitated by certain people wanting to trade Joe Webb and speculating on his trade value. The underlying assumption being that Ponder has somehow proven himself and Webb should be moved out of the way.

I don't know exactly how that discussion started, but I do know that most people on the ''Ponder side'', including myself, specifically stated that we are against trading Webb. It was, for the most part, a speculative decision. Nobody ''dislikes'' Webb, or wants him gone, we just have a different opinion on who is the better QB.

Preference aside, I cheered just as for Ponder as I did for Webb last year.
_________________

sig by Jamison
#97 Everson Griffin: 0 tackles : 0 sacks : 0 FF

milanb

Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 5181
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 11:36 am Post subject:

Kellerman wrote:

I don't know exactly how that discussion started,

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=490719&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Kellerman wrote:

but I do know that most people on the ''Ponder side'', including myself, specifically stated that we are against trading Webb. It was, for the most part, a speculative decision. Nobody ''dislikes'' Webb, or wants him gone, we just have a different opinion on who is the better QB.

And as Shah and I pointed out: there is a huge disconnect between all this trade speculation and what happened down on the field on game day in the final weeks of the season.
_________________

The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong. — Ecclesiastes 9:11

But that’s the way to bet. — Jimmy The Greek

Kellerman

Joined: 16 May 2010
Posts: 3195
Location: Amsterdam

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 11:43 am Post subject:

milanb wrote:

Kellerman wrote:

I don't know exactly how that discussion started,

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=490719&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Kellerman wrote:

And as Shah and I pointed out: there is a huge disconnect between all this trade speculation and what happened down on the field on game day in the final weeks of the season.

Well, it wasn't me, I'm against trading him.
_________________

sig by Jamison
#97 Everson Griffin: 0 tackles : 0 sacks : 0 FF

Purplexing

Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 3627
Location: Outside Valhalla, looking in.

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 6:05 pm Post subject:

Kellerman wrote:

milanb wrote:

Kellerman wrote:

I don't know exactly how that discussion started,

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=490719&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Kellerman wrote:

And as Shah and I pointed out: there is a huge disconnect between all this trade speculation and what happened down on the field on game day in the final weeks of the season.

Well, it wasn't me, I'm against trading him.

The decision to use Webb as a QB seems to point to the coaches lack of satisfaction with Webb as a WR, and comfort with him as a (backup) QB.

Therefore, it's fair to discuss what would happen if Webb were stranded on the bench for the 2012 season - IF Ponder played well (one scenario).

Since we don't know if many of the rookies, young players, and untested free agent additions made in 2012 will work out, the Vikings may need to replace them in 2013. Free agency doesn't look like it is Spielman's preference, and high draft picks may not be enough to replace several of those players. So, if teams value mobile QBs, like Tebow, then Webb might be traded for a needed player or a draft pick. Denver could have kept Tebow around, but chose to use his unused value to help them improve their roster.

At this point, Webb is unproven, but some think the last few games meant something more significant than is the case. Taking the last 2 games he played, he looked good. Taking only the last game, not as good. So, how many 'last games' do you use for judging? With about 150 passes in his career, it seems to be too soon to judge Webb as a QB. But we might know more or enough if he gets a lot of regular season game snaps in 2012.

Webb's development at QB will be seen in pre-season, but it might not be enough to judge his value as a QB for the Vikings, or in a trade. I would also need to see the Vikings come up with a developmental QB in 2012 or draft one in 2013 if they consider trading Webb after 2012.

Maybe not using Webb as a WR on occasion also means the WRs look good, or have great potential, so that Webb can focus on the QB position?
_________________

When we stop to think about it, most folks behavior isn't perplexing after all.

CriminalMind

Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 2965
Location: Toronto, CA

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 6:31 pm Post subject:

I think Webb move to primarily QB-only has to do with the fact that we drafted 2 WRs that are going to need as much practice time snaps to get up to speed.

The fact that going QB-only will help Webb slightly concentrate more on the QB position if Ponder gets hurt or flames out.
_________________

vikingsrule

Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 39549
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 7:44 pm Post subject:

CriminalMind wrote:

Agreed, MN was severely lacking at WR talent the past few years, making it somewhat necessary to give Webb a few looks there. Childs and Wright have good potential, may as well give them the practice reps and let Webb focus on being the best backup QB he can be. If he has to relieve Ponder, due to injury or poor play, hopefully he will be in a better position to do so than in years past.

Purplexing

Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 3627
Location: Outside Valhalla, looking in.

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 8:04 pm Post subject:

vikingsrule wrote:

CriminalMind wrote:

I'm not aware of Childs and Wright's potential, so excuse me if I just speculate that they aren't locks to be good or great WRs.

I agree the move of Webb to QB only makes sense in light of drafting WRs with greater potential than Camarillo, Aromashadu, etc. He should focus on being a QB with greater need there than at WR.

I looked down the road to 2013, or even the end of 2012, when we know more about the new guys, and considered the need to replace some of them in 2013. It still seems like a waste of talent to keep Webb off the field if Ponder is playing well. But I don't know how to make use of his talent in that case, other than to do what Denver did with Tebow's talent; i.e. exchange it. However, that would also require a QB being added to replace Webb, assuming Rosenfels isn't effective as QB#2.

I also now see this as providing insurance against Ponder busting in 2012. But I assume the Vikings aren't prepared to make a run in the playoffs, let alone reach the playoffs. So, rather than this being insurance to salvage a chance at a SB win, I see it as a way to achieve the best W-L record in 2012. So, maybe there is more than 1 reason.
_________________

When we stop to think about it, most folks behavior isn't perplexing after all.

Klomp

Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Posts: 3430
Location: The Home of Schwan's Ice Cream

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 8:18 pm Post subject:

Purplexing wrote:

Their floors are arguably better than Camarillo and Aromahadu, never mind their potential ceilings.

Purplexing

Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 3627
Location: Outside Valhalla, looking in.

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 9:42 pm Post subject:

Klomp wrote:

Purplexing wrote:

Their floors are arguably better than Camarillo and Aromahadu, never mind their potential ceilings.

Possibly so, but what about Webb, i.e. the thread topic?

Is his ceiling good enough to take over, without drafting competition, if Ponder busts?
_________________

When we stop to think about it, most folks behavior isn't perplexing after all.

Bermuda Viking

Joined: 19 Mar 2005
Posts: 4533
Location: Paget, Bermuda

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 9:47 pm Post subject:

I think Webb is a great backup to throw in at this point. He has proven that. Team have to almost change cleats to deal with him.

that said our management sees this and doesnt see him as a starter for they must think teams will adjust and shut him down.

I think this is the issue. The team doesnt see him as a 16-20 game QB. They see him as the ultimate throw-in to win a game in a pinch.

I don't want Webb to go anywhere. I would hate to see another team snatch him and blow the roof off, but I don't think our staff is so stupid as to not see that he can do it now so this is quite confusing.

Bottom line to me is - the coaching staff does not believe Joe Webb is a starting QB in the NFL right now and drafted Ponder for they think he will be. Not that Ponder IS, but that he will be, and they must not be willing to risk that much for Webb despite how I think they want Webb right here with us. Did I mention confusing?
_________________

I love the Vikings.

Purplexing

Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 3627
Location: Outside Valhalla, looking in.

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 9:58 pm Post subject:

Bermuda Viking wrote:

Why wouldn't a team just start an 'ultimate throw in to win a game' ?

i.e. throw him in at the start of the game (after announcing the other guy as the starter?).
_________________

When we stop to think about it, most folks behavior isn't perplexing after all.

Bermuda Viking

Joined: 19 Mar 2005
Posts: 4533
Location: Paget, Bermuda

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 10:00 pm Post subject:

Purplexing wrote:

Bermuda Viking wrote:

Why wouldn't a team just start an 'ultimate throw in to win a game' ?

i.e. throw him in at the start of the game (after announcing the other guy as the starter?).

I wish I knew the answer to that. All I can say is that I think that like the wildcat it doesnt work as a foundation.
_________________

I love the Vikings.

Bermuda Viking

Joined: 19 Mar 2005
Posts: 4533
Location: Paget, Bermuda

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 10:08 pm Post subject:

Purplexing wrote:

Bermuda Viking wrote:

Why wouldn't a team just start an 'ultimate throw in to win a game' ?

i.e. throw him in at the start of the game (after announcing the other guy as the starter?).

I'll throw in a parallel that might make for discussion not needed, but I am a Knicks fan (I like punishment all around) and they have Carmelo Anthon who on any given day can win a game, yet you can't build a team around him and win a championship. The team just can't function and grow and gel with this type of player in the lead despite the prowess of the player and his ability to win games on his own. Sooner or later the team gets broken down for the strength of every player other than the leader has been weakened by the strentgh of the leader himself.
Tebow is now on punt block assignment for the same reason. Denver didnt feel they could raise everyones game whilst raising Tebow's. I think this is what Webb is facing. It's the game and the other 64 players and not Webb.
_________________

I love the Vikings.

Purplexing

Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 3627
Location: Outside Valhalla, looking in.

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 10:18 pm Post subject:

Bermuda Viking wrote:

Purplexing wrote:

Bermuda Viking wrote:

Why wouldn't a team just start an 'ultimate throw in to win a game' ?

i.e. throw him in at the start of the game (after announcing the other guy as the starter?).

I wish I knew the answer to that. All I can say is that I think that like the wildcat it doesnt work as a foundation.

If U R correct, that would mean Webb cannot be a starter. Or, consistently effective starter. So, he is the QB equivalent of a 3rd down RB.

I see merit keeping him at QB, the same as putting a 3rd down RB, or nickel and dime DBs, on the roster.

It's always possible that he develops into a more well rounded QB, rather than a sub QB. Unlike the K and P positions, there is room for more than 1 QB on the roster.

I still hope that the Vikings make better use of Webb than sitting him on the bench as QB#2, even if that means trading him after the season for someone they can put on the field more often, in a position of need. Preferably, they find a niche role other than QB, where he can contribute, yet continue to be a (relief) QB.
_________________

When we stop to think about it, most folks behavior isn't perplexing after all.

Purplexing

Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 3627
Location: Outside Valhalla, looking in.

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 10:23 pm Post subject:

Bermuda Viking wrote:

Purplexing wrote:

Bermuda Viking wrote:

Why wouldn't a team just start an 'ultimate throw in to win a game' ?

i.e. throw him in at the start of the game (after announcing the other guy as the starter?).

Webb as a K blocker would make sense, due to his jumping ability. A new 'Matt Blair' on STs.

My above post suggests Webb as being the QB equivalent of a 3rd down RB.
_________________

When we stop to think about it, most folks behavior isn't perplexing after all.

Display posts from previous:

       FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 6, 7, 8 ... 10, 11, 12  Next

Page 7 of 12

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum