<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pack Attack)</div><div class='quotemain'>Culpepper's biggest problem wasn't losing Randy Moss. It was getting hurt... He only started 7 games the year after he lost Moss and only 4 games for the 'Fins this year. The question of how well Daunte will do without Moss has yet to be answered. He hasn't had the chance.</div> And how many did he win in those 7 weeks? how many Td's? How many Ints? how many sacks? how many fumbles? Those 7 weeks were the worst of daunte's career because Teams no longer had to game plan agianst moss.. who at the time was probably the most dangerous WR in the NFL..all that was left was a bunch of no name WR's and culpepper who couldn't get it done.. he wasn't even in the same region of getting it done.. and don't give me the Whole he had noone to throw to or this or that Cause Tom Brady seems to do it just fine
Oh i forgot to add that Mcnabb did it well for years too without a #1 option at WR.. Then came the Owens season.. and we saw what a solid #1 option at the WR position can do for a QB
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bears#1Fan)</div><div class='quotemain'>Ok now i ask Do you watch the games??? r read about them??? Culpepper was traded because of his and Childresses differences.. nothing more nothing less.. Does anyone really belive That Brad Johnson was so Great to dethrown Culpepper??? Moss didn't have to catch all the TD's... Defenses Had to Game plan agianst Moss week in week out.. means Double coverage.. what does double coverage mean??? thats right someone else is open somewhere so all he has to do is make the smart play.. Take Moss out of the equasion what do you get?? man on man.. No double covers means less options.. Moss didn't have to catch all the TD's his presence alone back then was more then plenty to take the heat off culpepper.. and it never hurt to have the 1 reciver who could out jump all CB's In the entire league so all he had to do is heave it.. doesn't matter where cause Moss used to go get the ball.. Take it all away and you have what is now culpepper</div> Thank you for the explanation of how defenses work. What would I do without your help. Seriously, why all the venom? This is a pretty easy thing to understand... Take a look at Culpepper's season by season stats. Here, I'll make it easy for you: Culpepper's Career Stats. Ok, now look at the 2002 statistics. Lowest comp% and 2nd worst TD/Int ratio (with the exception of this year which is injury shortened). Suddenly in 2003 we have a jump in CPeps stats - why would this be? Did Moss not play in 2002? Its supposed to be easy to be a QB when you have Moss pulling double coverages and outjumping every CB in the league. Well, if you know anything about the Vikings, you would remember that Scott Linehan started working one on one with Culpepper between 2002 and 2003 as a QB coach (in addition to being the O-Coordinator). In 2003 Culpepper started to avoid pressing which is his biggest problem. In 2004 he improved even more, was more and more careful with the ball, and was finally able to show the league what he could do. In 2005 Linehan was not resigned and left for Miami. Now I'll give you this: Pepp's stats were better because of Moss, but Moss was not the reason for his success. If it was just Moss, then he wouldn't have had his 2002 season when Moss was healthy. Also, let's look at Culpepper's best year (2004). What were Moss's stats? 13 TD's, less than 1,000 yards receiving in 13 games. Why so few yards when Culpepper was busy throwing 39 TDs and over 4700 yards? It would be due to Moss's injury which kept out of 3 games and before being held out only played a few series in the two previous games. How did Culpepper do during this time? QB ratings of 103, 62, 121, 117, and 97. The 62 passer rating was against the Giants who Culpepper has rarely played well against. When Moss did come back, he was not 100% - even to the point where teams stopped rolling that much vaunted double coverage which is supposedly (according to you) the only reason Culpepper is/was successful. So as much as you want to say it was Moss, everything points to Culpepper just being a good QB with the right coach. If you want to show me some actual proof that Culpepper is only good because of Moss, I'd love to see it, but as you can see it doesn't appear that you are right.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (vikingfan)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bears#1Fan)</div><div class='quotemain'>Ok now i ask Do you watch the games??? r read about them??? Culpepper was traded because of his and Childresses differences.. nothing more nothing less.. Does anyone really belive That Brad Johnson was so Great to dethrown Culpepper??? Moss didn't have to catch all the TD's... Defenses Had to Game plan agianst Moss week in week out.. means Double coverage.. what does double coverage mean??? thats right someone else is open somewhere so all he has to do is make the smart play.. Take Moss out of the equasion what do you get?? man on man.. No double covers means less options.. Moss didn't have to catch all the TD's his presence alone back then was more then plenty to take the heat off culpepper.. and it never hurt to have the 1 reciver who could out jump all CB's In the entire league so all he had to do is heave it.. doesn't matter where cause Moss used to go get the ball.. Take it all away and you have what is now culpepper</div> Thank you for the explanation of how defenses work. What would I do without your help. Seriously, why all the venom? .</div> And why the need to be sarcastic??? I guess its not so much the whole moss is the factor but people discard the moss factor into Culpeppers #s.. In 2002 Moss accounted for almost 1/2 of culpeppers TD passes.. So culpepper has 1 great season without the luxury of moss.. but 13 out of 39 is still a high # of TD passes.. Everything else can be stemmed into the moss culpepper equasion.. and in 2004 moss only was inactive for 3 games.. so they still had to game plan around him.. Culpeppers biggest problem is he got away from the way he USED to play football.. He used to run.. 2002 10 TD runs.. 10, i repeat 10.. So what is really hurting culpepper.. he clearly needs a #1 reciver a safety valve if u will.. Culpepper will get his chance to show he is the QB you claim him to be.. since we all know Harrington prob is not miamis answer.. So culpepper will have his chance.. At which time if he comes threw to the QB your saying he is.. then i will retract my statement.. if he fails.. then i will stand bye what i said And for the 3rd thing.. there is no venom just talk
Even if Culpepper does not return to form, it does not prove that Moss was the reason for his success. I've been claiming since 2005 that it was Linehan leaving - reunite him with Linehan and lets see what happens. Yes, he had 10 rushing TDs in 2002, but he also had more INTs than TDs and was benched during the year because of a bad performance. 2002 is a bad year for Culpepper. Yes, Moss was inactive for only 3 games, but the rest of the season teams did not scheme for him. You did not have the regular double coverage that did open up the rest of the field. Look, don't get me wrong - I really like Moss and I like Culpepper - I think they are both great players who worked extremely well together. I just think that crediting all of Culpepper's success to Moss is a claim that lacks a full understanding of just how good Culpepper is and can be. At the same time, he can be a very bad QB if he is not playing 'within himself'.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (vikingfan)</div><div class='quotemain'>Even if Culpepper does not return to form, it does not prove that Moss was the reason for his success. I've been claiming since 2005 that it was Linehan leaving - reunite him with Linehan and lets see what happens. Yes, he had 10 rushing TDs in 2002, but he also had more INTs than TDs and was benched during the year because of a bad performance. 2002 is a bad year for Culpepper. Yes, Moss was inactive for only 3 games, but the rest of the season teams did not scheme for him. You did not have the regular double coverage that did open up the rest of the field. Look, don't get me wrong - I really like Moss and I like Culpepper - I think they are both great players who worked extremely well together. I just think that crediting all of Culpepper's success to Moss is a claim that lacks a full understanding of just how good Culpepper is and can be. At the same time, he can be a very bad QB if he is not playing 'within himself'.</div> I don't have you wrong at all.. And i don't 100% fully think its moss but moss inflated culpeppers #'s this year culpepper gets a free ride.. injury i belive was his down fall this season.. But the shortened season before injury.. he was horrible.. i can't let it all on him because the offensive line wasn't all that great.. but culpepper threw bad passes.. held the ball way to long.. Culpepper is a Qb that needs the #1 option to be consistant.. If the vikings can get a solid #1 reciver.. and a QB thats not as old as father time. I would put money the vikings have a shot at a SB apperance.. You have found a Good RB.. Your defense is good.. would be better if they didn't have to be on the feild 52 minutes a game..
Well, I would still disagree with how much emphasis you put on Culpepper's need for a #1 receiver. Culpepper was also known for spreading the ball around extremely well - usually completing passes to 7+ receivers. He does press, he does hold on to the ball too long, but these are things that he wasn't doing when Linehan was coaching him personally. That's why I point to Linehan time and time again - Culpepper has all the skills to be a great QB, he just needs the coaching. All Minnesota's hopes right now are riding on Jackson developing as a QB. We'll see just how good he can be on Thursday, but I think there is hope for him to develop alongside Troy Williamson. Williamson has had a case of the drops this year, but he has shown flashes. If he can develop alongside a young QB, we might have a great tandem developing.
