NFL 2012 Season Week 14 Picks

Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!

These are not our most current picks!
Our freshest batch of picks are the NFL 2018 Season Super Bowl Picks.

Jeremy's PicksMatt's PicksJon's PicksSarah's Picks
Broncos 26 @ Raiders 13
Final
Thu, 12/6/12 7:20pm
17 Picks - 89% 2 Picks - 11%
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Bears 14 @ Vikings 21
Final
Sun, 12/9/12 12:00pm
14 Picks - 74% 5 Picks - 26%
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Bears
Bears
Chargers 34 @ Steelers 24
Final
Sun, 12/9/12 12:00pm
4 Picks - 21% 15 Picks - 79%
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Ravens 28 @ Redskins 31
final overtime
Sun, 12/9/12 12:00pm
9 Picks - 47% 10 Picks - 53%
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Redskins
Redskins
Falcons 20 @ Panthers 30
Final
Sun, 12/9/12 12:00pm
17 Picks - 89% 2 Picks - 11%
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Panthers
Panthers
Jets 17 @ Jaguars 10
Final
Sun, 12/9/12 12:00pm
14 Picks - 74% 5 Picks - 26%
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Titans 23 @ Colts 27
Final
Sun, 12/9/12 12:00pm
2 Picks - 11% 17 Picks - 89%
Colts
Colts
Colts
Colts
Colts
Colts
Colts
Colts
Eagles 23 @ Buccaneers 21
Final
Sun, 12/9/12 12:00pm
1 Pick - 5% 18 Picks - 95%
Buccaneers
Buccaneers
Buccaneers
Buccaneers
Buccaneers
Buccaneers
Buccaneers
Buccaneers
Chiefs 7 @ Browns 30
Final
Sun, 12/9/12 12:00pm
2 Picks - 11% 17 Picks - 89%
Browns
Browns
Browns
Browns
Browns
Browns
Browns
Browns
Rams 15 @ Bills 12
Final
Sun, 12/9/12 12:00pm
9 Picks - 47% 10 Picks - 53%
Bills
Bills
Rams
Rams
Bills
Bills
Bills
Bills
Cowboys 20 @ Bengals 19
Final
Sun, 12/9/12 12:00pm
5 Picks - 26% 14 Picks - 74%
Bengals
Bengals
Bengals
Bengals
Bengals
Bengals
Bengals
Bengals
Dolphins 13 @ 49ers 27
Final
Sun, 12/9/12 3:05pm
0 Picks - 0% 19 Picks - 100%
49ers
49ers
49ers
49ers
49ers
49ers
49ers
49ers
Saints 27 @ Giants 52
Final
Sun, 12/9/12 3:15pm
2 Picks - 11% 17 Picks - 89%
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Saints
Saints
Cardinals 0 @ Seahawks 58
Final
Sun, 12/9/12 3:15pm
1 Pick - 5% 18 Picks - 95%
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Lions 20 @ Packers 27
Final
Sun, 12/9/12 7:20pm
3 Picks - 16% 16 Picks - 84%
Packers
Packers
Lions
Lions
Lions
Lions
Packers
Packers
Texans 14 @ Patriots 42
Final
Mon, 12/10/12 7:30pm
6 Picks - 32% 13 Picks - 68%
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Week Record10 - 6
0.625
10 - 6
0.625
9 - 7
0.562
10 - 6
0.625
Season Record130 - 77
0.628
127 - 80
0.614
128 - 79
0.618
132 - 75
0.638
Scotttime Record1125 - 683
0.622
1088 - 720
0.602
1122 - 686
0.621
1143 - 665
0.632
No-Pack-Vike Record2516 - 1476
0.630
2447 - 1545
0.613
2530 - 1462
0.634
2492 - 1500
0.624
Lifetime Record1802 - 1073
0.627
1699 - 1176
0.591
1792 - 1083
0.623
1802 - 1073
0.627
click me!
Other Nut Canner Picks
scott.jpg
Broncos
Bears
Steelers
Redskins
Falcons
Jets
Colts
Buccaneers
Browns
Rams
Cowboys
49ers
Giants
Seahawks
Packers
Patriots

Week:12 - 4
0.750
Season:138 - 68
0.670
Lifetime:1148 - 654
0.637
2887.gif
Broncos
Bears
Steelers
Redskins
Falcons
Jets
Colts
Buccaneers
Browns
Bills
Cowboys
49ers
Giants
Seahawks
Packers
Texans

Week:10 - 6
0.625
Season:129 - 78
0.623
Lifetime:1117 - 689
0.619
images.jpg
Broncos
Bears
Steelers
Ravens
Falcons
Jaguars
Colts
Buccaneers
Browns
Bills
Cowboys
49ers
Giants
Seahawks
Packers
Patriots

Week:9 - 7
0.562
Season:80 - 68
0.540
Lifetime:963 - 649
0.597
image.jpeg
Broncos
Vikings
Chargers
Redskins
Falcons
Jets
Titans
Buccaneers
Browns
Rams
Cowboys
49ers
Giants
Seahawks
Packers
Patriots

Week:13 - 3
0.812
Season:106 - 48
0.688
Lifetime:411 - 256
0.616
l_ad719f619e5ad7f4b593814445bf63ec.jpg
Broncos
Bears
Steelers
Redskins
Falcons
Jaguars
Colts
Buccaneers
Chiefs
Rams
Bengals
49ers
Giants
Seahawks
Packers
Patriots

Week:9 - 7
0.562
Season:132 - 75
0.638
Lifetime:919 - 550
0.626
skull full.jpg
Raiders
Bears
Steelers
Redskins
Falcons
Jaguars
Colts
Buccaneers
Browns
Bills
Bengals
49ers
Giants
Seahawks
Packers
Texans

Week:7 - 9
0.438
Season:118 - 87
0.576
Lifetime:264 - 169
0.610
question_mark.gif
Broncos
Bears
Steelers
Redskins
Falcons
Jets
Colts
Buccaneers
Chiefs
Rams
Bengals
49ers
Giants
Seahawks
Packers
Texans

Week:9 - 7
0.562
Season:78 - 54
0.591
Lifetime:495 - 306
0.618
question_mark.gif
Broncos
Bears
Steelers
Redskins
Falcons
Jets
Colts
Buccaneers
Browns
Rams
Bengals
49ers
Giants
Seahawks
Packers
Patriots

Week:11 - 5
0.688
Season:135 - 56
0.707
Lifetime:596 - 302
0.664
Me at sams.jpg
Broncos
Bears
Steelers
Ravens
Falcons
Jaguars
Colts
Buccaneers
Browns
Bills
Cowboys
49ers
Saints
Seahawks
Packers
Patriots

Week:8 - 8
0.500
Season:132 - 71
0.650
Lifetime:405 - 244
0.624
hambone.jpg
Broncos
Bears
Steelers
Redskins
Falcons
Jets
Colts
Buccaneers
Browns
Bills
Bengals
49ers
Giants
Seahawks
Packers
Patriots

Week:10 - 6
0.625
Season:133 - 74
0.642
Lifetime:477 - 264
0.644
077.JPG
Broncos
Bears
Chargers
Ravens
Falcons
Jets
Colts
Buccaneers
Browns
Bills
Bengals
49ers
Giants
Seahawks
Packers
Patriots

Week:10 - 6
0.625
Season:135 - 72
0.652
Lifetime:399 - 239
0.625
IMG003.jpg
Broncos
Bears
Steelers
Redskins
Panthers
Jaguars
Colts
Buccaneers
Browns
Bills
Bengals
49ers
Giants
Seahawks
Packers
Patriots

Week:10 - 6
0.625
Season:137 - 70
0.662
Lifetime:390 - 205
0.655
ColorTouch.jpg
Broncos
Bears
Steelers
Ravens
Falcons
Jets
Colts
Buccaneers
Browns
Rams
Bengals
49ers
Giants
Seahawks
Packers
Texans

Week:9 - 7
0.562
Season:119 - 75
0.613
Lifetime:263 - 165
0.615
krystal.jpg
Broncos
Bears
Chargers
Ravens
Falcons
Jets
Colts
Buccaneers
Browns
Rams
Bengals
49ers
Giants
Seahawks
Packers
Texans

Week:10 - 6
0.625
Season:134 - 73
0.647
Lifetime:148 - 87
0.630
one-piece 01.jpg
Raiders
Vikings
Chargers
Ravens
Falcons
Jets
Titans
Eagles
Browns
Rams
Bengals
49ers
Giants
Cardinals
Lions
Texans

Week:8 - 8
0.500
Season:99 - 77
0.562
Lifetime:99 - 77
0.562
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!

Broncos 26 @ Raiders 13

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Thursday games keep getting better and better....

Bears 14 @ Vikings 21

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Without Harvin, Vikings are very one dimensional, although Peterson can't be stopped even with that knowledge.
jon.jpg
Jon
I don't have anything against the current offensive coordinator for the Vikings, but if Norv Turner is fired from San Diego and is interested in being a coordinator again, the Vikings should try to make it happen. Then again, I like the idea of bringing T.O. in for the rest of this season and once tried to recruit Deion Sanders to the Vikes back in 2000, so I don't know if they should listen to me or not.

Lions 20 @ Packers 27

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Megatron!
jon.jpg
Jon
I will repeat once again, the Lions are just really not a good team. I think their record is starting to show this a bit more, but seriously, there's just something wrong with that team. But I think they beat the Packers this time.

Texans 14 @ Patriots 42

sarah.jpg
Sarah
When is Brady going to retire already?
jon.jpg
Jon
Did I forget to comment on the Thursday game? Not intentional. But I do dislike the fact that there are Thursday games.
scott.jpgScott - On your mark...get set...Terrible!
12/05/2012 @ 08:41:58 AM
 Quote this comment
A perfect storm is brewing for the Packers. Not only is the number 2 seed within their grasp based on their remaining schedule and the 49ers remaining schedule, but there exists a decent possibility that the Giants will be bumped from the playoffs. I would say there is really only one team that would really scare me in the playoffs, and that's the Giants. I think given a second shot, the Packers could beat the 49ers or the Seahawks. And the Falcons are 11-1 in part by virtue of having played easiest schedule in the entire nfl based on strength of schedule; the Falcons don't strike me as an unbeatable team.

Of course, this is all predicated on my prediction that the Packers win their final 4 games, which I think is not an unthinkable task by an means.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this at 12/05/2012 8:43:27 am
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
12/05/2012 @ 09:56:54 AM
 Quote this comment
Welcome back, Ryan Grant.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
jon.jpgJon - 2846 Posts
12/08/2012 @ 05:46:23 AM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - 12/05/2012 @ 08:41:58 AM
A perfect storm is brewing for the Packers. Not only is the number 2 seed within their grasp based on their remaining schedule and the 49ers remaining schedule, but there exists a decent possibility that the Giants will be bumped from the playoffs. I would say there is really only one team that would really scare me in the playoffs, and that's the Giants.


Really? They're the only team that scares you? Have we watched the same Packers team this year? I know I shouldn't get into this because two years ago when we had this conversation, the Packers ended up grabbing the sixth seed and then ended the season with the trophy, but really? The Giants are the only team that scares you? Is that because the Packers were able to narrowly escape Jacksonville and Detroit in recent weeks and you know you won't have to face them in the playoffs? If I were a Packer fan, I would be scared of any team that has ever rushed the passer or intends to rush the passer at any time in the future. After last week, I would also be concerned about any team that has one or more offensive weapons.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
12/08/2012 @ 08:17:30 AM
 Quote this comment
Moreso what I mean by that is that the Giants are really the only team I would question the Packers ability to beat. I think the other teams in the NFC are beatable. The Packers lost to the 49ers, but it was only a one possession game. The Packers only "lost" to the seahawks because of a 1 in a billion alternate universe last second debacle that corrected the course of the NFL for all to benefit from. They will be getting their best pass rusher back by week 15, and will likely be at their healthiest by week 17. So yeah, I'd say that the only team I am truly scared of is the Giants. They lost by 28 points to the Giants. I'm not saying the Packers would definitely beat any other team they play, but I'd be most assured that they wouldn't beat the Giants. If they are to have a chance to reach the Super Bowl, the Giants better be out of the picture.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jon.jpgJon - many posts
12/08/2012 @ 09:05:42 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 08:17:30 AM
The Packers only "lost" to the seahawks because of a 1 in a billion alternate universe last second debacle that corrected the course of the NFL for all to benefit from.


incorrect
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - On your mark...get set...Terrible!
12/09/2012 @ 10:17:38 AM
 Quote this comment
No, I'm pretty sure I have pretty accurate.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - Super Chocolate Bear
12/09/2012 @ 09:41:31 PM
 Quote this comment
Some thoughts on Ponder:

First of all, let me preface this to ensure no one thinks I'm living in some rainbow land and making any statements like "everyone will be eating crow when he gets his bust in Canton." He's been average, and slightly above average, at his best.

That said, remember in weeks 3-5 when everyone in the media was certain the Vikings had hit on their QB of the future, and "easily" the best of his class? Yes, that was a perfect example of overly reacting to the moment. However, so is declaring his career over after a few games without his only real weapon in the passing game. Eau Claire newsman Bob Gallaher (@WEAUGallaher) was hardly the only person to over react, and likely based on a sample size of "I was only able to watch the last couple games", but he tweeted the following today: Ponder is easily the worst QB in the NFL. A waste of a draft pick for Minnesota. They will rue it for years to come.

First of all, really? EASILY? Second of all, that's just factually inaccurate. To be sure, no sports historians will be talking about the year Christian Ponder put up a 79.4 quarterback rating, but that puts him at 26th. And less than 4 points behind fellow NFCN QB Stafford, and less than 5 behind Cutler. Both of whom have the luxury of a receiver that will just go get virtually any ball. Can you even name a Vikings wide receiver, who isn't on IR? (He's also 29th in QBR, just ahead of Philip Rivers.)

Third, his rating, and overall "worth" is/was ALWAYS going to skew south of what it theoretically "could be". I'm not claiming "if you just factor this in they're almost equal" but expecting Ponder, a QB who plays on a team where virtually ALL TD attempts go to the running back, to put up the same type of quarterback rating as a guy like Aaron Rodgers, who gets virtually no TDs taken away by the running back, is just silly, even if they were equally talented quarterbacks both trying in vain to throw to a blanketed Michael Jenkins. The Vikings try like 2 plays a game to get more than 15 yards in one fell swoop, and anything close to the endzone AP gets just about every opportunity. Ponder's only real opportunity is when they're from the 15 to the 10, and even that would have to be a catch and run, as I can probably count on one hand the number of plays that call for passes that to actually be thrown into the endzone this season. Which is all to say; where exactly are people expecting that 4 TD game of Ponder's that "brings everyone back around" to come from?

He's right in the mix with Stafford and Bradford, who most people would say have been pretty solid hits, and (again, currently) ranks 4 spots ahead of Luck. (Who is obviously a rookie on a bad team, but the media has already declared him the second coming, despite his currently ranking only ahead of names such as Weeden, Sanchez, and Cassell.

Again, I'm not saying Ponder is definitely going to pan out, but people need to remember, this is his first real season, and the Vikings weren't "supposed" to win this year. They decided to not commit to anyone that wasn't going to contribute 3 years from now, and thus didn't go out and get a Vincent Jackson this year. The Vikings have no one other than Percy Harvin, and Kyle Rudolph, that are capable of making plays when everything doesn't go perfectly. The whole ride home everyone was talking about how ugly Ponder's two long attempts were. Though, as far as we could tell, one of them hit the receiver in the helmet from half a field away. Maybe that ball can be placed a little better, and it sure seemed like it could have been PI, but this is the NFL. I don't know what more people want from Ponder if they look at a play where the QB rainbows it in there from 40-60 on target enough to hit a receiver in the head, and then place the blame on the QB, and not the guy who forgot he has arms.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 9 times, last at 12/09/2012 10:06:45 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
12/10/2012 @ 07:58:02 AM
 Quote this comment
While I think Rodgers is a pretty good quarterback in his own right, he certainly did, as Favre pointed out once in an interview, fall into a good situation. He was fortunate enough to take over the starting quarterback job a) after gaining experience behind a hall of famer for a few years, and b) with a pretty good arsenal of receivers to throw to. So I agree that comparing a quarterback like Ponder who started as a rookie and who's team wasn't all that good to begin with, to a guy like Rodgers, who took over a team that was a game away from the Super Bowl the year before, is a little unfair. Ponder's completion percentage is ok, but for a guy who supposedly only throws short-ish passes, you'd probably like it to be a little higher.

The Vikings are sort of a unique team in the new NFL (that is, the NFL of the last 3 years) in that they have found a way to be at least somewhat effective as a run-first team. Having a back like AP turns your running game into almost a passing game, in effect. Peterson is averaging 6 yards a carry (that's more than Ponder's yards per attempt). Now I don't know the Vikings from a game by game standpoint, but I would imagine that even the best running game still limits your ability to play from behind. If a running team gets behind and the game is getting late, getting yards in a short period of time is going to be tough if you can't pass the ball. That's where you need to know you have quarterback that can be effective in pressure situations.

Teams can survive and even thrive in this league being one-dimensional. Heck, the Packers were a one-dimensional team in 2010 and won the Super Bowl. But that one-dimension better be passing. One dimensional running teams tend to be just average. So whatever the problem is, whether it's Ponder, the Receivers, the play calling, the pass protection, the Vikings will likely be an averge team without a passing game that can be a threat.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this at 12/10/2012 8:00:54 am
scott.jpgScott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone!
12/10/2012 @ 08:16:52 AM
 Quote this comment
Lions fans that are currently in college are not old enough to have witnessed a Detroit Lions victory in the state of Wisconsin.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott edited this at 12/10/2012 8:26:04 am
matt.jpgMatt - 3354 Posts
12/10/2012 @ 09:37:58 AM
 Quote this comment
As a former non-traditional student, I take offense at your insinuation that college students only come from a certain age range. emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it.
12/10/2012 @ 10:36:41 AM
 Quote this comment
I'll play the odds.emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
newalex.jpgAlex - I don't need to get steady I know just how I feel
12/10/2012 @ 10:36:29 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 09:41:31 PM
Some thoughts on Ponder:
... I don't know what more people want from Ponder if they look at a play where the QB rainbows it in there from 40-60 on target enough to hit a receiver in the head, and then place the blame on the QB, and not the guy who forgot he has arms.


I loved that this rant boiled down to, "Hey, these other QBs sucked too" and "the Vikings are a horrible team offensively other than AP" (even though they're both valid points).

Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 09:41:31 PM
He's right in the mix with Stafford and Bradford, who most people would say have been pretty solid hits, and (again, currently) ranks 4 spots ahead of Luck. (Who is obviously a rookie on a bad team, but the media has already declared him the second coming, despite his currently ranking only ahead of names such as Weeden, Sanchez, and Cassell.


Luck is 9th in ESPN's QBR, so he may have ventured into overrated status already, but he's doing something right.

Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 09:41:31 PM
Eau Claire newsman Bob Gallaher (@WEAUGallaher) was hardly the only person to over react, and likely based on a sample size of "I was only able to watch the last couple games", but he tweeted the following today: Ponder is easily the worst QB in the NFL. A waste of a draft pick for Minnesota. They will rue it for years to come.


As the 12th pick in the draft I'd say there's a good chance he ends up in the disappointing category, but even then I don't think it's quite that dramatic. They don't owe him nearly as much money as say, Sam Bradford, who I feel still hasn't really proven himself.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
12/11/2012 @ 12:28:47 PM
 Quote this comment
I don't think my point was "hey these other quarterbacks sucked too". It's just, if you're going to say someone is EASILY the worst, they probably should actually, at least, be the worst. Let alone actually pretty close to 2 of his rivals. Ponder wasn't even the worst QB in the very game that prompted that tweet, and these reactions. Cutler threw, essentially, 2 pick 6's and his rating is bolstered by a TD, whereas Ponder's chances went to Peterson and his INT was a low risk high reward "punt" in a situation the Vikings needed big yards, or would get no points anyway.

Likewise, you need to provide context to those numbers. Aaron Rodgers probably wouldn't have a 84 rating if he handed the ball off 70% of the time inside the 10, but the overly proportionate 2 yard TD passes by not even bothering to have running backs on the roster certainly help bolster his seemingly other-worldly rating every year. Conversely, Ponder (and any Vikings QB) will have more TD's "taken" from him than anyone.

I guess my point wasn't so much "there are a lot of people sucking too" it's just...is it fair to even call it "sucking" if he's smack dab in the middle of many young QB's in similar situations? When you factor every thing in, where exactly do people realistically think Ponder should be? I think if people really thought about that question things wouldn't look so bad. He's 8.1 points off being a dead average QB, and I think even expecting that this season would have been borderline unreasonable expectations.

I decided to end the "rant" before talking about the actual pick, but teams "blow" picks all the time. Even relatively successful players can be a "bust" for the slot/money (Like AJ Hawk). It magnifies it that he's a QB, because you could be developing someone else, but blowing a 12 isn't exactly franchise crippling. And they didn't pass on a guy like RG3 this year, thinking they had their man either.

In the end I just feel like it's one of those classic things that always plays out in sports where the whole offseason it's "So and so are going to struggle, but you have to rebuild" and then the season starts, the team/player struggles for the exact same obvious reason everyone knew, but instead of "yeah, well, we knew they needed a wideout before they could really compete and that rebuilding is painful" it's "WHAT?! Fire everyone! [the young qb] is an awful QB and human being! [the head coach] has to go! No excuse for being this bad!"
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 5 times, last at 12/11/2012 12:49:08 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
12/11/2012 @ 12:53:42 PM
 Quote this comment
You're getting awfully close to comparing Ponder to Rodgers as if a role reversal would give similar results. I'll assume that wasn't your intent and leave it be for now. But I'll throw it down if needed!

But since I'm thinking about it, Rodgers has about as many touchdown from 2 or less yards (17) as he does from 50 or more yards (16), for his career.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott perfected this at 12/11/2012 1:04:32 pm
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
12/11/2012 @ 01:06:26 PM
 Quote this comment
I only keep referring to Rodgers because he's probably the best example of a QB on a team that asks essentially nothing of their running backs, to contrast with Ponder, who has to be the best example of a QB on a team with the opposite approach. Also, like I said, that isn't the difference between falling to an 84 season and to a 105 season, but it could be the difference between a 104 season and a 99. More importantly though ADDING a handful of TDs to a 79 probably would make a pretty solid difference in perception.

I'm not saying "if you switched them they'd switched stats too", but I am saying they could be clones of each other and expecting similar ratings for those 2 situations described above would be unreasonable, even outside of the issue of how reasonable expecting Ponder to play more or less that well, just without the TDs, would be at this point.

Ponder is a young QB on a rebuilding team that doesn't get to mask a so-so day behind 2 short TDs very often, whereas many QB's do get that opportunity. Likewise, his rating takes a disproportionate hit when he throws an interception. So, where exactly is "good" for him, really? 80?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this 7 times, last at 12/11/2012 1:43:11 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
12/11/2012 @ 03:30:02 PM
 Quote this comment
There are other measures for a successful QB that don't include touchdowns, like yards per attempt or yards per completion. Ponder is 3rd to last in yards per attempt and dead last in yards per completion. Now this is still dependent on other factors too, like wide receivers and play calling, but it is what it is. Basically, I understand that it's probably too much to say he's "easily the worst", especially when the same people made the assertion that the Vikings were a rebuilding team, but that doesn't mean he isn't "possibly the worst" or "near the worst", or "the Vikings need to rethink their offense" or whatever. Basically, Ponder doesn't look good, whatever the reason might be.

I'm not saying Ponder is terrible, but I'm not saying he isn't terrible.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this 2 times, last at 12/11/2012 3:33:52 pm
jon.jpgJon - infinity + 1 posts
12/12/2012 @ 04:16:28 AM
 Quote this comment
I think Tagliabue undid the Saints suspensions as a way of evening out one of the large imbalances of his tenure. If you think about it, this move is essentially a large scale anti-BFR. A decade worth of penalties for touching Brett Favre wiped clean by one NFC Championship game full of financially-incentivized, penalty-free cheap shots aimed at causing injury to the ol' gamer.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jon screwed with this at 12/12/2012 4:19:03 am
scott.jpgScott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone!
12/12/2012 @ 07:45:43 AM
 Quote this comment
Let it go.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
12/13/2012 @ 12:11:14 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - 12/11/2012 @ 01:06:26 PM
I only keep referring to Rodgers because he's probably the best example of a QB on a team that asks essentially nothing of their running backs, to contrast with Ponder, who has to be the best example of a QB on a team with the opposite approach. Also, like I said, that isn't the difference between falling to an 84 season and to a 105 season, but it could be the difference between a 104 season and a 99. More importantly though ADDING a handful of TDs to a 79 probably would make a pretty solid difference in perception. I'm not saying "if you switched them they'd switched stats too", but I am saying they could be clones of each other and expecting similar ratings for those 2 situations described above would be unreasonable, even outside of the issue of how reasonable expecting Ponder to play more or less that well, just without the TDs, would be at this point. Ponder is a young QB on a rebuilding team that doesn't get to mask a so-so day behind 2 short TDs very often, whereas many QB's do get that opportunity. Likewise, his rating takes a disproportionate hit when he throws an interception. So, where exactly is "good" for him, really? 80?


Christian Ponder has more RedZone pass attempts than Aaron Rodgers. And Ponder has more pass attempts from inside the 10 yard line as well. Rodgers has 49 redzone pass attempts, Ponder has 61,

So in reality, it appears that Ponder is actually asked to do more than a guy like Rodgers, but is not good enough to execute. So it would appear that it isn't the "disproportionate 2 yard TD passes" that put someone like Rodgers over the top. And Ponder and Rodgers have the same number of touchdowns thrown from inside the 10 yard line. So that entire argument is seemingly debunked, and it starts with an inaccurate premise.

Rodgers has 11 touchdowns on throws that traveled more than 20 yards, Ponder has 1. That seems to be the real difference between a good QB and a bad/so-so QB. Rodgers (et al) isn't masking bad days with easy short touchdowns when Ponder is getting hosed by lack of opportunities. The others are performing at an entirely different level by making the big plays that a weaker QB can't/isn't.

I know there are other factors that play into a QB's stats, like quality of receivers and whatnot, but in this case, the porportion of opportunities in the Red Zone is not one of them.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this 8 times, last at 12/13/2012 12:34:53 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
12/13/2012 @ 04:58:27 PM
 Quote this comment
Not to belabor this point (but I will), but of Ponder's 14 TD passes this year, 6 (or 43%) are from 3 yards or closer. Rodgers only has 3 touchdowns from inside of 3 yards out of 28 (11%). So not only does Ponder have more passing attempts inside the red zone than Rodgers, he also has more "stat-padding" short touchdown passes than the guy who doesn't have any running backs to hand of to.

Basically, Ponder is probably worse than his QB rating indicate, based on the very standard that you thought might make him underrated. It is Ponder who has a disproportionate amount of short touchdown passes that would help him mask a bad day. So some of the days when "hey, his QB rating wasn't that bad", might actually be deceptively high because of a couple of 2 yard touchdown passes.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott edited this 2 times, last at 12/13/2012 5:01:41 pm
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 1.21 Gigawatts!?!?
12/13/2012 @ 09:06:03 PM
 Quote this comment
Well, that would be entirely expected that ponder would have more attempts and whatnot. The Vikings inch their way in more than the Packers. *

Most of what you said is exactly the point. Ponder isn't asked to make big plays. Maybe it's because they have no faith in him to pull them off, but it is what it is. He doesn't get a chance to do anything that adds to rating in a significant way, so then the negatives have a more glaring effect.

Edit: Basically, to summarize everything, Ponder can't make the plays they're not asking him to make, and they're not asking him to make anything more than 5 yard comebacks. Touchdowns was just one example because it was sort of obvious, but yes, there are lots of things where BAM that had a big positive impact on rating, but the Vikings don't do them. Ponder is asked to make maybe 2 passes a game where the ball is in the air more than 20 yards. Other than that he's asked to throw like 20 5 yard passes, so, again, where do people expect this monster day to come from? You get a few misses and a couple drops in there, and maybe even a pick, and the next thing you know you're 14/20 for 90 yards and a pick. (And I haven't even mentioned the fact that a big percentage of the plays he's passing on are when the team is behind the 8 ball on 3rd and long because a couple of their "3 yards and a cloud of dust" plays didn't work.

*I guess to put a finer point on it, the point wasn't who has more, the point is who gets a higher percentage of their opportunities. All the numbers you found above probably show is the Vikings have run more plays in the redzone, which wouldn't be at all surprising. The only way the notion above is "debunked" is if the Packers run the ball when they ARE in those situations as much as the Vikings do when they are. Obviously many of Ponder's TD are going to be short ones, the Vikings don't even try for the endzone until they're at the 4.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 4 times, last at 12/13/2012 10:17:02 pm
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Robots don't say 'ye'
12/13/2012 @ 10:31:23 PM
 Quote this comment
And again, I sort of feel like you're backing me in to a strawman of a case I've never made.

I've never made the case that Ponder ISN'T terrible. (And certainly not "is secretly good") and I've not really compared the to quarterbacks to each other in any way. I've just stated two pretty basic truths.

A) Adrian Peterson takes more play opportunities away from Ponder than perhaps most if not all RB/QB combos, and certainly a player like Aaron Rodgers who plays on a team that often realizes in mid air on the way to the game that they left their one able bodied RB sleeping in the attic. At one point during the Bears game the vikings had a drive that started on the 20, and a drive that started on the 5 following an interception. Adrian Peterson had something like 80 yards of rushing and 2 TDs on a handful of plays. Ponder can't invent downs, yardage, and TDs. I realize plays/results isn't a complete 0 sum game, but that effect is going to skew the numbers.

B) No one knows that Ponder IS terrible. Or, more to the point, where exactly should he be at, overreacting to the last couple games (in which he's had essentially no one to throw to) aside? I think if you took the season as a whole he's pretty much on track with exactly what people would have expected. He's been good (efficiency wise), he's been mediocre, and he's been dreadful, just like essentially every QB in the history of football like 16 games (and one training camp) into his career. He's a second year QB on a run-first, rebuilding, team, now playing without his only real receiving threat. Who are these people expecting him to regularly go 25/30 for 310 and 3 tds, and what rainbow planet do they live on?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy edited this 6 times, last at 12/13/2012 10:39:58 pm
jeremy.jpgJeremy - I believe virtually everything I read.
12/13/2012 @ 10:52:00 PM
 Quote this comment
And, just to reiterate, it's entirely possible the Vikings aren't running those plays because they have no faith in Ponder (or the blocking, or the receivers) but it is what it is. Ponder can't throw a 40 yard TD when he hands the ball off, or when all his receivers are boxing out defenders on a 5 yard curl. That isn't to say "if they just gave him a chance he'd show them all!!!", but you can't hold it against a guys stats that he's given almost no chance to compile stats, or hold it against him that he isn't completing any passes over ___ yards when they don't call for passes over ___ yards, and so on.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy perfected this at 12/13/2012 10:52:34 pm
scott.jpgScott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue.
12/13/2012 @ 10:53:40 PM
 Quote this comment
First off, I generally agree with your overall point that people made the claim that the Vikings were a rebuilding team and then forgetting the entire point now that the season is almost over. However, the points you were making didn't match up with the stats. You seemed to try to be saying that because the Vikings run the ball so much Ponder doesn't have the opportunities to throw the short, seemingly easy touchdown passes that other QBs have which would pad the stats of other QBs where Ponder would not have such opportunities. That's pretty close to exactly what you said. However, the short touchdown passes is exactly what Ponder has and he has lots of opportunities (more than other pass happy team--the Packers have the highest pass to run ratio in the redzone in the NFL). So I was just pointing out the err of that point.

So I suppose it's the chicken or the egg. Ponder has only completed 20% of his passes that traveled over 20 yards,, and only 1 out of 7 on passes that traveled more than 30 yards, so it's not unreasonable for someone to be frustrated and think he can't throw the deep ball. But then again, is he not throwing the ball down field because the coaches only ever call plays where receivers run 8 yard routes, are the receivers that bad, or is Ponder not willing to take the chance ever and always checks down to a running back 4 yards down field when other qbs would try. (ponder's second highest split total for pass attempts are for balls thrown behind the line of scrimmage--I'm not entirely sure what to make of that, but for Rodgers it's a more distant third). There's a lot of context that is hard to read even when looking at splits, and I don't have game film in front of me.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott edited this at 12/13/2012 10:56:46 pm
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
12/13/2012 @ 11:07:08 PM
 Quote this comment
I was talking relative percentages. Obviously the Vikings call pass plays inside the redzone, and even on the 2, but they don't call them at as high a percentage as many teams, and I'd be willing to bet they skew more toward the do-or-die/dire type situations when they do.

I don't have the numbers for this, but at least on Sunday it felt like virtually all the passes (in general) were in obvious passing situations. They don't take a shot on 2nd and 1, they run. They pass on 3rd and 9s. 3rd and 8s, 3rd and 12s etc. I don't mean to sound like I'm hitching my wagon to Ponder here, it's just that, the way I see it, in almost every way he's in a position where he can really only fail, so we can't be all shocked and horrified when he fails. I'm not saying we have to set the bar so low that 12/17 100 yards no picks no tds is a "decent day"...but I do think people need to pull their head out of the clouds and define what "success" for him should actually look like.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 4 times, last at 12/13/2012 11:16:01 pm
scott.jpgScott - Resident Tech Support
12/13/2012 @ 11:07:39 PM
 Quote this comment
But then again, in spite of all this, give Ponder 3 a Jordy Nelson, Gregg Jennings, Randall Cobb, and a Jermichel Finley, and who knows what he might be. But even on the "high percentage" 5 yard passes (1-10 yards in the air), Ponder is only completeting 63% of his passes. But again, your point isn't that he isn't bad, just that he isn't being asked to try to be good; or something like that. I think for the most part, we actually agree.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
12/13/2012 @ 11:17:09 PM
 Quote this comment
Even the packer game, which was without a doubt his worst game as a pro, if for no other reason than because of the situations where he screwed up.

They kept showing the passing numbers, talking about the passing numbers, talking about the passes to receivers (as if that matters), etc.

Well, meanwhile, All Day is running all day. Up, down, and all around. We don't have much context for what a QB's box score should look like when a RB goes double deuce on someone, but I'd guess they tend to look like solidly below average days by that QB.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue.
12/13/2012 @ 11:18:35 PM
 Quote this comment
I think a few things are reasonable for fans in the Vikings situation (and by reasonable I mean stupid because nothing fan does actually has an effect on things)
1) demand a better/new coach
2) demand a new offensive philosophy
3) demand a new QB

With a running back like AP, it can be easy to over rely on him too much. So if what you say is true and the Vikings are running the ball on 2nd and 1, then I would be calling for the play-caller's head for several reasons: 1) 2-1 is the perfect time to let your QB you don't trust to try a deep chance, since you still have 3rd down 2) if your running back that you run into the ground is so good, 3rd and 1 should be no problem. But if you have a QB that you don't trust, then what's the use in sticking with him? In fairness, it's not like you can just pick up a future hall of famer any time you want, so at some point you go to battle with the army you have, but that doesn't mean you have to throw a guy out there and constantly put him positions where you're asking the QB you don't trust to succeed in low percentage areas.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/13966/christian-ponder
although, checking his splits, his pass attempt and comp % on 1st, 2nd, and 3rd down is fairly even.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - No one's gay for Moleman
12/13/2012 @ 11:21:38 PM
 Quote this comment
Yeah, I'd be interested to see that breakdown during his struggles, but either way it doesn't tell the story, because teams are going to have more first downs than any down, followed by second downs, etc.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings
12/13/2012 @ 11:27:25 PM
 Quote this comment
All right, that's settled. NEXT TOpic (ala max kellerman)!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
question_mark.gifGina Wartson (Guest)
07/12/2013 @ 09:34:47 PM
 Quote this comment
I hope this post will be read by a lot of individuals who are a boxing enthusiast, who basically writes blogs articles about the latest and updated fights yearly including the marquez vs bradley fight to mention a few.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
Leave a Comment of your very own
Name:
Comment:
Verify this code
Verify the Code in this box, or sign in, to post a comment.
click me!
There's an emoticon for how you feel!
click me!
My Files
Sign up, or login, to be able to upload files for Nutcan.com users to see.