Dolphins waiting for CPepp to be cut (1 Viewer)

[jeter23]

The Dolphins expect Minnesota to release quarterback Daunte Culpepper before the Vikings are scheduled to pay him a $6 million roster bonus on March 17.Because of that belief, the Dolphins have resisted the offer to trade for Culpepper, who also is scheduled to make $2 million in base salary for the 2006 season. The Dolphins and Vikings recently discussed a trade for Culpepper. Although no exact compensation was discussed, the Vikings are asking for more than the second-round pick that was reported this month. Despite those discussions, the Dolphins are not interested in a trade at this point.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/sports/13948554.htm

 

[Shermanator]

I just cant believe the Vikings would just release a franchise quarterback like that. He holds to much value.

 

[BlueOnion]

The Dolphins expect Minnesota to release quarterback Daunte Culpepper before the Vikings are scheduled to pay him a $6 million roster bonus on March 17.

Interesting. I will have to assume the Dolphins have a better idea (from speaking directly with the Vikings) what they want to do and how quickly they want to do it [re: Culpepper]Is worth noting that Culepper came out this week and said he was open to moving his roster bonus due date back to accomodate the Vikings' need.

 

[BigJim®]

The Dolphins expect Minnesota to release quarterback Daunte Culpepper before the Vikings are scheduled to pay him a $6 million roster bonus on March 17.

Interesting. I will have to assume the Dolphins have a better idea (from speaking directly with the Vikings) what they want to do and how quickly they want to do it [re: Culpepper]

Why the heck would you think that? Do you think the Vikes called the Dolphins to say "We'd like you to trade for Daunte but in all honesty we plan to cut him before his bonus is due"?

 

[BlueOnion]

Why the heck would you think that? Do you think the Vikes called the Dolphins to say "We'd like you to trade for Daunte but in all honesty we plan to cut him before his bonus is due"?

I just believe the information given to us through the media is vague, all we know is the Vikings spoke to the Dolphins. I don't think it is crazy to assume there is more details about the communications between the teams.

Maybe the Vikings made one phone call to the Dolphins and were pretty ambigious about their own interest in Daunte by saying, "Daunte seems unhappy, we were curious if you would have any interest in him?" After which, there were no other communications between the teams.

Or, maybe Saban's secretary was beeping Saban in his office, "Mr. Saban, it is the Vikings on line 1 again. They want to know if you have had a change of heart in the last 30 minutes?"

 

[nygiants56]

but isn't c-pepp out until mid november anyways? you're not going to run thru 1/2 of the season with brad johnson at QB, then replace him with a guy who hasn't played in a full year...johnson did well in 2005, cpepp has a costly salary and maybe the vikings feel they could better use that money elsewhere, perhaps signing a franchise RB like Maroney or White, and getting away from the RBBC project that they've employed over the past 8 years or so..

3 torn ligaments in the same knee is going to be hard to fully recover from...

if they kept him, they've invested alot of money in what is essentially a backup qb..lets not forget, he looked ordinary sans Randy Moss..johnson was more effective.plain and simple..

 

[BlueOnion]

if they kept him, they've invested alot of money in what is essentially a backup qb..lets not forget, he looked ordinary sans Randy Moss..johnson was more effective.plain and simple..

Urban Legend.Culpepper and Johnson stats against non playoff teams, comparable.

Culpepper and Johnson stats against playoff teams, comparable.

Sure Johnson's stats against non-playoff teams look better than Culpepper's stats against playoff teams, but is that really a fair comparison?

 

[stbugs]

if they kept him, they've invested alot of money in what is essentially a backup qb..lets not forget, he looked ordinary sans Randy Moss..johnson was more effective.plain and simple..

Urban Legend.Culpepper and Johnson stats against non playoff teams, comparable.

Culpepper and Johnson stats against playoff teams, comparable.

Sure Johnson's stats against non-playoff teams look better than Culpepper's stats against playoff teams, but is that really a fair comparison?

Culpepper was awful and while his yardage/completion % look OK it was because they were behind ridiculously because of his 12 INTs in the 5 losses that CPepp started. They were 2-5 with him as a starter and the 2 games they won were against 3-13 NO and 4-12 GB.

Yes, the 5 games they lost were to TB, Chicago, Cincy, Carolina and Atlanta, but they were outscored 157-47 in those games. That is absurdly bad. CPepp threw for 233+ yards in 4 of the 5 losses which isn't hard when you are down 2 to 3 TDs in every game and the defense is playing prevent/their backups. By the way, to back that up, the Vikings were outscored 95-10 in the first halfs of those 5 losses, yes 95-10.

Johnson was 7-2 as a starter and while his stats weren't gaudy, the team won. CPepp lost 4 of those 5 games by himself (got hurt in the 5th) because of the horrible decisions. You can't discount the 12 INTs from CPepp and give him the benefit of almost all of his yardage coming in garbage time or against garbage teams. Again, CPepp threw more INTs in one game than Johnson did in 10 games, that is not comparable.

 

[BlueOnion]

if they kept him, they've invested alot of money in what is essentially a backup qb..lets not forget, he looked ordinary sans Randy Moss..johnson was more effective.plain and simple..

Urban Legend.Culpepper and Johnson stats against non playoff teams, comparable.

Culpepper and Johnson stats against playoff teams, comparable.

Sure Johnson's stats against non-playoff teams look better than Culpepper's stats against playoff teams, but is that really a fair comparison?

Culpepper was awful and while his yardage/completion % look OK it was because they were behind ridiculously because of his 12 INTs in the 5 losses that CPepp started. They were 2-5 with him as a starter and the 2 games they won were against 3-13 NO and 4-12 GB.

Yes, the 5 games they lost were to TB, Chicago, Cincy, Carolina and Atlanta, but they were outscored 157-47 in those games. That is absurdly bad. CPepp threw for 233+ yards in 4 of the 5 losses which isn't hard when you are down 2 to 3 TDs in every game and the defense is playing prevent/their backups. By the way, to back that up, the Vikings were outscored 95-10 in the first halfs of those 5 losses, yes 95-10.

Johnson was 7-2 as a starter and while his stats weren't gaudy, the team won. CPepp lost 4 of those 5 games by himself (got hurt in the 5th) because of the horrible decisions. You can't discount the 12 INTs from CPepp and give him the benefit of almost all of his yardage coming in garbage time or against garbage teams. Again, CPepp threw more INTs in one game than Johnson did in 10 games, that is not comparable.

Making a case that Culpepper was awful against TB, Chicago, Cincy, Carolina and Atlanta is not disputing my case. Considering Johnson played just as poorly against the likes of the Giants, Steelers and Ravens.But instead of looking at how Johnson played against the Giants, Steelers and Ravens, you want to evaluate how Johnson did against Detroit twice, St. louis Green Bay, Cleveland and Chicago (with no starters). Johnson looked serviceable against inferior competition, but when Culpepper played inferior competition he looked just as good (if possibly more impressive) against the Saints and Packers.

Just because you look like a stud beating up a 12 year old kid, doesn't mean you could administer the same pounding to Michael Spinks that Mike Tyson dished out.

 

[MLBrandow]

if they kept him, they've invested alot of money in what is essentially a backup qb..lets not forget, he looked ordinary sans Randy Moss..johnson was more effective.plain and simple..

Urban Legend.Culpepper and Johnson stats against non playoff teams, comparable.

Culpepper and Johnson stats against playoff teams, comparable.

Sure Johnson's stats against non-playoff teams look better than Culpepper's stats against playoff teams, but is that really a fair comparison?

Culpepper was awful and while his yardage/completion % look OK it was because they were behind ridiculously because of his 12 INTs in the 5 losses that CPepp started. They were 2-5 with him as a starter and the 2 games they won were against 3-13 NO and 4-12 GB.

Yes, the 5 games they lost were to TB, Chicago, Cincy, Carolina and Atlanta, but they were outscored 157-47 in those games. That is absurdly bad. CPepp threw for 233+ yards in 4 of the 5 losses which isn't hard when you are down 2 to 3 TDs in every game and the defense is playing prevent/their backups. By the way, to back that up, the Vikings were outscored 95-10 in the first halfs of those 5 losses, yes 95-10.

Johnson was 7-2 as a starter and while his stats weren't gaudy, the team won. CPepp lost 4 of those 5 games by himself (got hurt in the 5th) because of the horrible decisions. You can't discount the 12 INTs from CPepp and give him the benefit of almost all of his yardage coming in garbage time or against garbage teams. Again, CPepp threw more INTs in one game than Johnson did in 10 games, that is not comparable.

Making a case that Culpepper was awful against TB, Chicago, Cincy, Carolina and Atlanta is not disputing my case. Considering Johnson played just as poorly against the likes of the Giants, Steelers and Ravens.But instead of looking at how Johnson played against the Giants, Steelers and Ravens, you want to evaluate how Johnson did against Detroit twice, St. louis Green Bay, Cleveland and Chicago (with no starters). Johnson looked serviceable against inferior competition, but when Culpepper played inferior competition he looked just as good (if possibly more impressive) against the Saints and Packers.

Just because you look like a stud beating up a 12 year old kid, doesn't mean you could administer the same pounding to Michael Spinks that Mike Tyson dished out.

 

[stbugs]

if they kept him, they've invested alot of money in what is essentially a backup qb..lets not forget, he looked ordinary sans Randy Moss..johnson was more effective.plain and simple..

Urban Legend.Culpepper and Johnson stats against non playoff teams, comparable.

Culpepper and Johnson stats against playoff teams, comparable.

Sure Johnson's stats against non-playoff teams look better than Culpepper's stats against playoff teams, but is that really a fair comparison?

Culpepper was awful and while his yardage/completion % look OK it was because they were behind ridiculously because of his 12 INTs in the 5 losses that CPepp started. They were 2-5 with him as a starter and the 2 games they won were against 3-13 NO and 4-12 GB.

Yes, the 5 games they lost were to TB, Chicago, Cincy, Carolina and Atlanta, but they were outscored 157-47 in those games. That is absurdly bad. CPepp threw for 233+ yards in 4 of the 5 losses which isn't hard when you are down 2 to 3 TDs in every game and the defense is playing prevent/their backups. By the way, to back that up, the Vikings were outscored 95-10 in the first halfs of those 5 losses, yes 95-10.

Johnson was 7-2 as a starter and while his stats weren't gaudy, the team won. CPepp lost 4 of those 5 games by himself (got hurt in the 5th) because of the horrible decisions. You can't discount the 12 INTs from CPepp and give him the benefit of almost all of his yardage coming in garbage time or against garbage teams. Again, CPepp threw more INTs in one game than Johnson did in 10 games, that is not comparable.

Making a case that Culpepper was awful against TB, Chicago, Cincy, Carolina and Atlanta is not disputing my case. Considering Johnson played just as poorly against the likes of the Giants, Steelers and Ravens.But instead of looking at how Johnson played against the Giants, Steelers and Ravens, you want to evaluate how Johnson did against Detroit twice, St. louis Green Bay, Cleveland and Chicago (with no starters). Johnson looked serviceable against inferior competition, but when Culpepper played inferior competition he looked just as good (if possibly more impressive) against the Saints and Packers.

Just because you look like a stud beating up a 12 year old kid, doesn't mean you could administer the same pounding to Michael Spinks that Mike Tyson dished out.

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes. The turnovers aren't anywhere close and that it were the comparison falls apart to me.No matter who the competition was, Johnson kept them in ball games and helped his team win most of them. Culpepper lost 4 games all by himself and padded his stats against two of the worst teams in the NFL and in garbage time that he created. In the 9 games Johnson started, they lost at Baltimore by 7 and lost to the Super Bowl champs by 15 (Johnson had 2 INTs in this game, his worst game all year). In Culpepper's 7 starts, they lost one game by 11, one by 20 (to a non playoff team) and two by 25 and those games weren't really even that close.

Edit to Add: Which stats would you rather have, a guy that plays consistent, doesn't turn the ball over and keeps you in every game or a guy that loses you every game against good opponents and even a .500 team with bad mistakes and can light it up against 2 of the bottom 5 teams in the league?

 

[Norseman]

if they kept him, they've invested alot of money in what is essentially a backup qb..lets not forget, he looked ordinary sans Randy Moss..johnson was more effective.plain and simple..

Urban Legend.Culpepper and Johnson stats against non playoff teams, comparable.

Culpepper and Johnson stats against playoff teams, comparable.

Sure Johnson's stats against non-playoff teams look better than Culpepper's stats against playoff teams, but is that really a fair comparison?

Culpepper was awful and while his yardage/completion % look OK it was because they were behind ridiculously because of his 12 INTs in the 5 losses that CPepp started. They were 2-5 with him as a starter and the 2 games they won were against 3-13 NO and 4-12 GB.

Yes, the 5 games they lost were to TB, Chicago, Cincy, Carolina and Atlanta, but they were outscored 157-47 in those games. That is absurdly bad. CPepp threw for 233+ yards in 4 of the 5 losses which isn't hard when you are down 2 to 3 TDs in every game and the defense is playing prevent/their backups. By the way, to back that up, the Vikings were outscored 95-10 in the first halfs of those 5 losses, yes 95-10.

Johnson was 7-2 as a starter and while his stats weren't gaudy, the team won. CPepp lost 4 of those 5 games by himself (got hurt in the 5th) because of the horrible decisions. You can't discount the 12 INTs from CPepp and give him the benefit of almost all of his yardage coming in garbage time or against garbage teams. Again, CPepp threw more INTs in one game than Johnson did in 10 games, that is not comparable.

Making a case that Culpepper was awful against TB, Chicago, Cincy, Carolina and Atlanta is not disputing my case. Considering Johnson played just as poorly against the likes of the Giants, Steelers and Ravens.But instead of looking at how Johnson played against the Giants, Steelers and Ravens, you want to evaluate how Johnson did against Detroit twice, St. louis Green Bay, Cleveland and Chicago (with no starters). Johnson looked serviceable against inferior competition, but when Culpepper played inferior competition he looked just as good (if possibly more impressive) against the Saints and Packers.

Just because you look like a stud beating up a 12 year old kid, doesn't mean you could administer the same pounding to Michael Spinks that Mike Tyson dished out.

 

[BlueOnion]

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes. The turnovers aren't anywhere close and that it were the comparison falls apart to me.

I strongly disagree. Lets look at the two different schedules:

With Culpepper

L Tampa Bay

L at Cincinnati

W New Orleans

L at Atlanta

L at Chicago

W Green Bay

L at Carolina

With Johnson

W Detroit

W at NY Giants

W Cleveland

W at Detroit

W St. Louis

L Pittsburgh

L at Baltimore

W Chicago (no starters, no bold)

I bolded the playoff teams.

I don't know how you can compare Detroit, Detroit, Cleveland, Green Bay, St. Louis and Chicago (with no starters) to the likes of Carolina, Chicago, Tampa Bay and Cincinnati.

 

[stbugs]

if they kept him, they've invested alot of money in what is essentially a backup qb..lets not forget, he looked ordinary sans Randy Moss..johnson was more effective.plain and simple..

Urban Legend.Culpepper and Johnson stats against non playoff teams, comparable.

Culpepper and Johnson stats against playoff teams, comparable.

Sure Johnson's stats against non-playoff teams look better than Culpepper's stats against playoff teams, but is that really a fair comparison?

Culpepper was awful and while his yardage/completion % look OK it was because they were behind ridiculously because of his 12 INTs in the 5 losses that CPepp started. They were 2-5 with him as a starter and the 2 games they won were against 3-13 NO and 4-12 GB.

Yes, the 5 games they lost were to TB, Chicago, Cincy, Carolina and Atlanta, but they were outscored 157-47 in those games. That is absurdly bad. CPepp threw for 233+ yards in 4 of the 5 losses which isn't hard when you are down 2 to 3 TDs in every game and the defense is playing prevent/their backups. By the way, to back that up, the Vikings were outscored 95-10 in the first halfs of those 5 losses, yes 95-10.

Johnson was 7-2 as a starter and while his stats weren't gaudy, the team won. CPepp lost 4 of those 5 games by himself (got hurt in the 5th) because of the horrible decisions. You can't discount the 12 INTs from CPepp and give him the benefit of almost all of his yardage coming in garbage time or against garbage teams. Again, CPepp threw more INTs in one game than Johnson did in 10 games, that is not comparable.

Making a case that Culpepper was awful against TB, Chicago, Cincy, Carolina and Atlanta is not disputing my case. Considering Johnson played just as poorly against the likes of the Giants, Steelers and Ravens.But instead of looking at how Johnson played against the Giants, Steelers and Ravens, you want to evaluate how Johnson did against Detroit twice, St. louis Green Bay, Cleveland and Chicago (with no starters). Johnson looked serviceable against inferior competition, but when Culpepper played inferior competition he looked just as good (if possibly more impressive) against the Saints and Packers.

Just because you look like a stud beating up a 12 year old kid, doesn't mean you could administer the same pounding to Michael Spinks that Mike Tyson dished out.

How so? The difference between teams in the NFL isn't quite as absurd as the comparison from a 12 year old to Mike Tyson. Tampa Bay lost to the Jets and SF. Atlanta lost to GB and had their biggest win of the year against Minny. Carolina lost to NO, beat Detroit by 1, GB by 3 and Buffalo and Arizona by 4 and had their 3rd biggest win of the year against Minny. Chicago lost to Cleveland and had their second biggest winning margin against CPepp. Cincy lost to Buffalo and had their biggest win of the year against CPepp.CPepp had 4 miserable, game losing performances out of 6 games. Johnson had 1 bad, game losing performance out of 10 games. How in the world do they compare even with the whole competition thing?

You guys keep thinking in terms of Fantasty, which CPepp is good at, but this is the NFL and Johnson played far better than CPepp did, period. They weren't comparable at all.

 

[Bizkiteer]

What's funny is that if they wait until Mid March for CPep to be released then they will have missed out on the D. Brees sweepstakes. Thus, they can play roulet and hope CPep is in fact released or make a play for Brees on March 3rd.

 

[gman8343]

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes. The turnovers aren't anywhere close and that it were the comparison falls apart to me.

I strongly disagree. Lets look at the two different schedules:

With Culpepper

L Tampa Bay

L at Cincinnati

W New Orleans

L at Atlanta

L at Chicago

W Green Bay

L at Carolina

With Johnson

W Detroit

W at NY Giants

W Cleveland

W at Detroit

W St. Louis

L Pittsburgh

L at Baltimore

W Chicago (no starters, no bold)

I bolded the playoff teams.

I don't know how you can compare Detroit, Detroit, Cleveland, Green Bay, St. Louis and Chicago (with no starters) to the likes of Carolina, Chicago, Tampa Bay and Cincinnati.

why would anyone want a QB who sucks against good teams?

 

[BigJim®]

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes.

That is simply not true. Just another example of someone browsing stats and making crap completely up. FACT: 8 of Culpepper's 12 INTs came when the Vikes were already down by 14 points or more, 4 of them when the Vikes were down 28 or more... during "pass to catch up" mode against defenses cheating the pass. To state as a fact that the Vikes were down 95-10 at halftime "because of his mistake" INTs that didn't occur until the 2nd half of games is complete fiction. There is plenty of blame to go around for why the Vikes got blown out in those games, with a good deal of the blame falling squarely on the defense.

 

[stbugs]

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes. The turnovers aren't anywhere close and that it were the comparison falls apart to me.

I strongly disagree. Lets look at the two different schedules:

With Culpepper

L Tampa Bay

L at Cincinnati

W New Orleans

L at Atlanta

L at Chicago

W Green Bay

L at Carolina

With Johnson

W Detroit

W at NY Giants

W Cleveland

W at Detroit

W St. Louis

L Pittsburgh

L at Baltimore

W Chicago (no starters, no bold)

I bolded the playoff teams.

I don't know how you can compare Detroit, Detroit, Cleveland, Green Bay, St. Louis and Chicago (with no starters) to the likes of Carolina, Chicago, Tampa Bay and Cincinnati.

Even with that, I would say Johnson was better. He at least was in one winning game against a playoff team, even if you want to discount Chicago. You are ignoring the fact that Minny wasn't even in the games against the good opponents, or even in the game against Atlanta. Who cares if Johnson beat bad or OK teams, he still won those games.CPepp was outscored 95-10 in the first half and 157-47 against the teams that you are lauding. He wasn't even in the game until padding some yardage in the second halves. At that point, Minny was pretty much playing the worst football in the league and luckily got to play 2 of the bottom 5 teams. How is that comparable to Johnson who went 7-2 as a starter? Seattle had a crap easy schedule, so what, they got to the Super Bowl.

This is the same as taking out the "long run" in the stats of a player. CPepp played about as bad as a QB has played. If you are playing well, you should win at a least one game

 

[stbugs]

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes. The turnovers aren't anywhere close and that it were the comparison falls apart to me.

I strongly disagree. Lets look at the two different schedules:

With Culpepper

L Tampa Bay

L at Cincinnati

W New Orleans

L at Atlanta

L at Chicago

W Green Bay

L at Carolina

With Johnson

W Detroit

W at NY Giants

W Cleveland

W at Detroit

W St. Louis

L Pittsburgh

L at Baltimore

W Chicago (no starters, no bold)

I bolded the playoff teams.

I don't know how you can compare Detroit, Detroit, Cleveland, Green Bay, St. Louis and Chicago (with no starters) to the likes of Carolina, Chicago, Tampa Bay and Cincinnati.

why would anyone want a QB who sucks against good teams?

 

[BlueOnion]

why would anyone want a QB who sucks against good teams?

Who are throwing under the bus here, Johnson or Culpepper?

 

[Norseman]

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes. The turnovers aren't anywhere close and that it were the comparison falls apart to me.

I strongly disagree. Lets look at the two different schedules:

With Culpepper

L Tampa Bay

L at Cincinnati

W New Orleans

L at Atlanta

L at Chicago

W Green Bay

L at Carolina

With Johnson

W Detroit

W at NY Giants

W Cleveland

W at Detroit

W St. Louis

L Pittsburgh

L at Baltimore

W Chicago (no starters, no bold)

I bolded the playoff teams.

I don't know how you can compare Detroit, Detroit, Cleveland, Green Bay, St. Louis and Chicago (with no starters) to the likes of Carolina, Chicago, Tampa Bay and Cincinnati.

Even with that, I would say Johnson was better. He at least was in one winning game against a playoff team, even if you want to discount Chicago. You are ignoring the fact that Minny wasn't even in the games against the good opponents, or even in the game against Atlanta. Who cares if Johnson beat bad or OK teams, he still won those games.CPepp was outscored 95-10 in the first half and 157-47 against the teams that you are lauding. He wasn't even in the game until padding some yardage in the second halves. At that point, Minny was pretty much playing the worst football in the league and luckily got to play 2 of the bottom 5 teams. How is that comparable to Johnson who went 7-2 as a starter? Seattle had a crap easy schedule, so what, they got to the Super Bowl.

This is the same as taking out the "long run" in the stats of a player. CPepp played about as bad as a QB has played. If you are playing well, you should win at a least one game

Johnson's performance in the win against the Giants wasn't the reason that they won that game. The offense scored 3 points, while the defense and special teams scored 21. Johnson had very little to do with that win.

 

[BoltBacker]

What's funny is that if they wait until Mid March for CPep to be released then they will have missed out on the D. Brees sweepstakes. Thus, they can play roulet and hope CPep is in fact released or make a play for Brees on March 3rd.

I'm not so sure that's true.Brees will only sign before Mid March if he gets a great contract offer but I don't see too many teams in a salary cap situation to give him that big offer and a void at QB. Maybe MIN will try to sign Brees before deciding whether or not to release Culpepper. In that scenario MIA still has a great shot at one of them either way.

 

[BlueOnion]

What's funny is that if they wait until Mid March for CPep to be released then they will have missed out on the D. Brees sweepstakes.  Thus, they can play roulet and hope CPep is in fact released or make a play for Brees on March 3rd.

I'm not so sure that's true.Brees will only sign before Mid March if he gets a great contract offer but I don't see too many teams in a salary cap situation to give him that big offer and a void at QB. Maybe MIN will try to sign Brees before deciding whether or not to release Culpepper. In that scenario MIA still has a great shot at one of them either way.

I think Brees will know what he can get on the open market by March 6th, I don't think he would need to wait until mid-March.

 

[BoltBacker]

I think Brees will know what he can get on the open market by March 6th, I don't think he would need to wait until mid-March.

You don't think several of the teams that would be in the market for his services would want to have a clearer idea of how the top QB's in the draft will shake out?What teams do you think will be in the market for his services that have the cap space to sign him?

 

[BlueOnion]

You don't think several of the teams that would be in the market for his services would want to have a clearer idea of how the top QB's in the draft will shake out?

Free agency is March 3. The draft is mid\late April. Each team's picture will not get much clearer between March 3 and April 20ish.

What teams do you think will be in the market for his services that have the cap space to sign him?

Do you know what Brees will and will not take?

 

[BoltBacker]

You don't think several of the teams that would be in the market for his services would want to have a clearer idea of how the top QB's in the draft will shake out?

Free agency is March 3. The draft is mid\late April. Each team's picture will not get much clearer between March 3 and April 20ish.

Strongly disagree.There are so many QB's playing musical chairs this off season nobody knows anything yet. Just the TEN/McNair decision by itself could mean the decision between TEN going OL or QB in the draft..... which would have ramifications on QB hungry teams behind them.

I'd guess Brees gets paid more than the average of the top half of the starting QB's in the league but still well short of $10mil. Not many teams can afford either of those figures at the moment and several teams are trying to threaten....err, negotiate with players to take a pay cut. Some will take a lower salary. Some will get cut and test the FA market. Some will even return to their original team after testing the FA waters. But I'm willing to guess they won't all be signed, sealed and delivered by mid March.

 

[stbugs]

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes. The turnovers aren't anywhere close and that it were the comparison falls apart to me.

I strongly disagree. Lets look at the two different schedules:

With Culpepper

L Tampa Bay

L at Cincinnati

W New Orleans

L at Atlanta

L at Chicago

W Green Bay

L at Carolina

With Johnson

W Detroit

W at NY Giants

W Cleveland

W at Detroit

W St. Louis

L Pittsburgh

L at Baltimore

W Chicago (no starters, no bold)

I bolded the playoff teams.

I don't know how you can compare Detroit, Detroit, Cleveland, Green Bay, St. Louis and Chicago (with no starters) to the likes of Carolina, Chicago, Tampa Bay and Cincinnati.

Even with that, I would say Johnson was better. He at least was in one winning game against a playoff team, even if you want to discount Chicago. You are ignoring the fact that Minny wasn't even in the games against the good opponents, or even in the game against Atlanta. Who cares if Johnson beat bad or OK teams, he still won those games.CPepp was outscored 95-10 in the first half and 157-47 against the teams that you are lauding. He wasn't even in the game until padding some yardage in the second halves. At that point, Minny was pretty much playing the worst football in the league and luckily got to play 2 of the bottom 5 teams. How is that comparable to Johnson who went 7-2 as a starter? Seattle had a crap easy schedule, so what, they got to the Super Bowl.

This is the same as taking out the "long run" in the stats of a player. CPepp played about as bad as a QB has played. If you are playing well, you should win at a least one game

Johnson's performance in the win against the Giants wasn't the reason that they won that game. The offense scored 3 points, while the defense and special teams scored 21. Johnson had very little to do with that win.

I understand and agree, but that is like the post above that Culpepper's 12 INTs weren't really bad either, and I never even discussed the 5 fumbles in the 7 starts either. 17 turnovers in basically 6 games has to have an impact especially since all but 1 were in the 4 losses that CPepp played the whole game.Also, in that Giants game, Minnesota had 2 missed FGs and a Michael Bennett fumble and the Giants offense had almost 30 more plays. Hard to score a lot on offense when you never get the ball back because your special teams/defense scores 3 times.

I still don't understand how anyone can compare a guy (just 2005 mind you) who had 17 turnovers and 1 TD pass in 5 losses and had 1 turnover and 5 TD passes against 2 teams that were a combined 7-25 to a guy who was 7-2 as a starter. I am not comparing fantasy numbers of previous years, just 2005 NFL results.

 

[Bizkiteer]

You don't think several of the teams that would be in the market for his services would want to have a clearer idea of how the top QB's in the draft will shake out?

Free agency is March 3. The draft is mid\late April. Each team's picture will not get much clearer between March 3 and April 20ish.

Strongly disagree.There are so many QB's playing musical chairs this off season nobody knows anything yet. Just the TEN/McNair decision by itself could mean the decision between TEN going OL or QB in the draft..... which would have ramifications on QB hungry teams behind them.

I'd guess Brees gets paid more than the average of the top half of the starting QB's in the league but still well short of $10mil. Not many teams can afford either of those figures at the moment and several teams are trying to threaten....err, negotiate with players to take a pay cut. Some will take a lower salary. Some will get cut and test the FA market. Some will even return to their original team after testing the FA waters. But I'm willing to guess they won't all be signed, sealed and delivered by mid March.

I think most front offices will jump on a commodity that's proven or known. Thus, getting Brees early will allow them to not have to take a chance w/ a young guy who has to sit and watch for a year. Especially when it comes to MIAMI, they have several needs on the OL and the aging defense where they could use that draft pick for another area if they could land a legit QB in FA. I see it as a no brainer...

 

[BigJim®]

I am not comparing fantasy numbers of previous years, just 2005 NFL results.

Well that's just great for your argument since Daunte's previous year was one of the all time greatest under OC Scott Linehan: 5100 total yards, 41 total TDs, 110 passer rating (not to mention just 11 INTs). Good idea limiting this to assessing a 3-time Pro Bowler's first 6 games with OL coach Steve Loney running an NFL offense. I'd want to stay away from relevant proven historic performance too if I were in your shoes.

 

[BoltBacker]

I think most front offices will jump on a commodity that's proven or known. Thus, getting Brees early will allow them to not have to take a chance w/ a young guy who has to sit and watch for a year. Especially when it comes to MIAMI, they have several needs on the OL and the aging defense where they could use that draft pick for another area if they could land a legit QB in FA. I see it as a no brainer...

Like WHO though? Which teams specifically?I agree with MIA, but that's what we were talking about in the first place. MIA doesn't have to worry about signing Brees before mid-March becuase MIA might sign him before that. MIN would be my second guess if they really are to the point they are considering releasing Daunte, but even in that scenario MIA isn't left out in the cold because that makes Daunte a FA.

So who do you think has both the cap space and the need for Brees that might sign him before mid-March? I think even BAL would have to trim a lot of cap space off their roster to afford him.

 

[Maelstrom]

I still don't understand how anyone can compare a guy (just 2005 mind you) who had 17 turnovers and 1 TD pass in 5 losses and had 1 turnover and 5 TD passes against 2 teams that were a combined 7-25 to a guy who was 7-2 as a starter. I am not comparing fantasy numbers of previous years, just 2005 NFL results.

This discussion has been had in detail throughout the season, with stats to back it all up (especially regarding the ints of which only 1 really swung the game before it was already out of reach due to the DF giving up too many points.)Culpepper struggled for the first 4-5 games, but was really starting to get a hold of the offense again (IMO) and I have little doubt that if he doesn't blow out his knee, and the same coaching decisions were made (one of the biggest factors of last year's turnaround), that he would have put up a very similar record to what BJohnson was able to.

This is a classic case of the QB getting all the blame when a team loses, and then getting all the credit when they win. It was much more than that:

1) Schedule - been discussed above

2) coaching changes - Loosing Linehan and Moss took some time to adjust to, also Tice simplified the DF signals around the time Cpep got hurt, which helped them be more cohesive and able to keep the offense in the game. Also stopped relying on QB to win the game when CPep went down and relied more on the running game and defense - more conservative game plan overall, which should have been implimented at the beginning of the season

3) personel changes - brought in a center to replace withrow who was struggling badly, defense got better as new players gelled together and learned the system, WRs got better as they learned the system (TTaylor, KRob) and matured (TWill)

4) players stepped up - team drew together after the sex boat scandal and seemed more focused after that point, also was a bit of a rally around the team after CPep got hurt

This has nothing to do with his fantasy numbers - the losses last year were a combination of the TEAM playing poorly, unfocused, bad coaching, bad gameplans and more I'm sure.

 

[Liquid Tension]

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes.

That is simply not true. Just another example of someone browsing stats and making crap completely up. FACT: 8 of Culpepper's 12 INTs came when the Vikes were already down by 14 points or more, 4 of them when the Vikes were down 28 or more... during "pass to catch up" mode against defenses cheating the pass. To state as a fact that the Vikes were down 95-10 at halftime "because of his mistake" INTs that didn't occur until the 2nd half of games is complete fiction. There is plenty of blame to go around for why the Vikes got blown out in those games, with a good deal of the blame falling squarely on the defense.

Good job Big Jim, those are stats that say a lot. I think people are missing the point that the defense started jelling and playing better later in the year as well and that helped the offense a lot.

 

[BlueOnion]

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes.

That is simply not true. Just another example of someone browsing stats and making crap completely up. FACT: 8 of Culpepper's 12 INTs came when the Vikes were already down by 14 points or more, 4 of them when the Vikes were down 28 or more... during "pass to catch up" mode against defenses cheating the pass. To state as a fact that the Vikes were down 95-10 at halftime "because of his mistake" INTs that didn't occur until the 2nd half of games is complete fiction. There is plenty of blame to go around for why the Vikes got blown out in those games, with a good deal of the blame falling squarely on the defense.

 

[bumpman]

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes.

That is simply not true. Just another example of someone browsing stats and making crap completely up. FACT: 8 of Culpepper's 12 INTs came when the Vikes were already down by 14 points or more, 4 of them when the Vikes were down 28 or more... during "pass to catch up" mode against defenses cheating the pass. To state as a fact that the Vikes were down 95-10 at halftime "because of his mistake" INTs that didn't occur until the 2nd half of games is complete fiction. There is plenty of blame to go around for why the Vikes got blown out in those games, with a good deal of the blame falling squarely on the defense.

stbugs got

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

I think a trade is much more likely than him being outright released. Some team out there will give up a quality draft pick (at least) to acquire Culpepper, even with his contract and injury.

 

[BigTex]

I think a trade is much more likely than him being outright released. Some team out there will give up a quality draft pick (at least) to acquire Culpepper, even with his contract and injury.

ESPN radio is reporting that the Vikes want a 2nd and a 3rd, that's a little too much IMHO.Good luck with that Vikes.

 

[stbugs]

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes.

That is simply not true. Just another example of someone browsing stats and making crap completely up. FACT: 8 of Culpepper's 12 INTs came when the Vikes were already down by 14 points or more, 4 of them when the Vikes were down 28 or more... during "pass to catch up" mode against defenses cheating the pass. To state as a fact that the Vikes were down 95-10 at halftime "because of his mistake" INTs that didn't occur until the 2nd half of games is complete fiction. There is plenty of blame to go around for why the Vikes got blown out in those games, with a good deal of the blame falling squarely on the defense.

stbugs got

Oh well, I guess I did.I mean it was a new OC so 17 turnovers in 6 games is to be expected, I mean Daunte really was playing well. I mean he barely has more experience than Alex Smith and he was just coming off one of the best seasons ever for a QB, so really we should have all expected such horrible performance, even though the backup QB stepped in just fine and only threw 4 interceptions in almost twice as many games, but then again Johnson has been a perennial all-pro.

So what 8 INTs came when the Vikes were down, I mean it isn't like a QB is supposed to help the team actually come back is he? I mean it isn't like there are any great QBs in the past who have ever brought a team back from a 14 point deficit. Besides that vaunted prevent defense is known for its ability to create turnovers and stop comebacks.

Dear lord, Daunte followed up a tremendous, unbelievable 2004 with a crappy ### 2005. The same people jumping to Daunte's defense are the ones in other threads hoping the Vikings can get a high draft pick for him. I don't see any Cincy fans thinking the same way about Palmer.

 

[Sopranos]

He is not going to get cut

 

[stbugs]

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes.

That is simply not true. Just another example of someone browsing stats and making crap completely up. FACT: 8 of Culpepper's 12 INTs came when the Vikes were already down by 14 points or more, 4 of them when the Vikes were down 28 or more... during "pass to catch up" mode against defenses cheating the pass. To state as a fact that the Vikes were down 95-10 at halftime "because of his mistake" INTs that didn't occur until the 2nd half of games is complete fiction. There is plenty of blame to go around for why the Vikes got blown out in those games, with a good deal of the blame falling squarely on the defense.

Good job Big Jim, those are stats that say a lot. I think people are missing the point that the defense started jelling and playing better later in the year as well and that helped the offense a lot.

While that may be true, don't you think it helps the defense when the offense (QB) has less than one turnover a game in the last 9 games than having 22 in the 1st five games? Daunte averaged 1 TD a game and almost 4 TOs a game while Johnson averaged more than 1 TD a game and under 1 TO a game. It may be the chicken/egg thing, but Daunte definitely hurt the team more than he helped, period.Oh well, I am done arguing, but I think you guys are taking it a bit easy on CPepp blaming the "team" for the losses. An All-Pro QB is supposed to win games for a team, even against tough opponents and even when the defense has a bad game.

*I did not count Daunte's injury game where Johnson had no turnovers because that isn't easy for any team to get by.

 

[Donnybrook]

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes. The turnovers aren't anywhere close and that it were the comparison falls apart to me.

I strongly disagree. Lets look at the two different schedules:

With Culpepper

L Tampa Bay

L at Cincinnati

W New Orleans

L at Atlanta

L at Chicago

W Green Bay

L at Carolina

With Johnson

W Detroit

W at NY Giants

W Cleveland

W at Detroit

W St. Louis

L Pittsburgh

L at Baltimore

W Chicago (no starters, no bold)

I bolded the playoff teams.

I don't know how you can compare Detroit, Detroit, Cleveland, Green Bay, St. Louis and Chicago (with no starters) to the likes of Carolina, Chicago, Tampa Bay and Cincinnati.

why would anyone want a QB who sucks against good teams?

Sep 8 Oakland Won 30-20 Sep 18 @Carolina Lost 17-27

Sep 25 @Pittsburgh Won 23-20

Oct 2 San Diego Lost 17-41

Oct 9 @Atlanta Won 31-28

Oct 16 @Denver Lost 20-28

Week 7 BYE

Oct 30 Buffalo Won 21-16

Nov 7 Indianapolis Lost 21-40

Nov 13 @Miami Won 23-16

Nov 20 New Orleans Won 24-17

Nov 27 @Kansas City Lost 16-26

It's a team sport. I consider Tom Brady the best QB in the league but his team still lost to playoff contenders. Albeit NE did beat Pittsburg.

 

[-OZ-]

So against teams of comparable talent to the Vikings, CPep was 2-1.

Johnson was 5-1.

Look, I like Culpepper as much as the next guy, but his 2005 performance was subpar. He may have pulled it around, but he got hurt.

Look to the future, IMO he'll rebound after this injury and be fine. Not the #1 FF QB anymore, but very good.

 

[stbugs]

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes. The turnovers aren't anywhere close and that it were the comparison falls apart to me.

I strongly disagree. Lets look at the two different schedules:

With Culpepper

L Tampa Bay

L at Cincinnati

W New Orleans

L at Atlanta

L at Chicago

W Green Bay

L at Carolina

With Johnson

W Detroit

W at NY Giants

W Cleveland

W at Detroit

W St. Louis

L Pittsburgh

L at Baltimore

W Chicago (no starters, no bold)

I bolded the playoff teams.

I don't know how you can compare Detroit, Detroit, Cleveland, Green Bay, St. Louis and Chicago (with no starters) to the likes of Carolina, Chicago, Tampa Bay and Cincinnati.

why would anyone want a QB who sucks against good teams?

Sep 8 Oakland Won 30-20 Sep 18 @Carolina Lost 17-27

Sep 25 @Pittsburgh Won 23-20

Oct 2 San Diego Lost 17-41

Oct 9 @Atlanta Won 31-28

Oct 16 @Denver Lost 20-28

Week 7 BYE

Oct 30 Buffalo Won 21-16

Nov 7 Indianapolis Lost 21-40

Nov 13 @Miami Won 23-16

Nov 20 New Orleans Won 24-17

Nov 27 @Kansas City Lost 16-26

It's a team sport. I consider Tom Brady the best QB in the league but his team still lost to playoff contenders. Albeit NE did beat Pittsburg.

Tom Brady also has won some Super Bowls as well. NE beat Pittsburgh, Atlanta, Miami and Tampa (whom you left of the list). Don't forget that Atlanta was 8-5 and in very good position to go to the playoffs before they pulled a New Orleans and lost their last 3.Anyway, all you did was point out that with a new OC, injuries galore to the a defense that allowed only 6 less points than Minny and injuries to Dillon, Givens and Graham, Brady was 4-5 against playoff contenders. CPepp, by comparison was 0-4.

Thanks for the help!

 

[stbugs]

So against teams of comparable talent to the Vikings, CPep was 2-1.

Johnson was 5-1.

Look, I like Culpepper as much as the next guy, but his 2005 performance was subpar. He may have pulled it around, but he got hurt.

Look to the future, IMO he'll rebound after this injury and be fine. Not the #1 FF QB anymore, but very good.

Pretty much summed up what I was trying to say. Make all the excuses you want for CPepp, but I would expect more from a 3(4?) time all-pro. I hope he does get back on track because it sucks for one bad hit to end a career.

Also, CPepp was 0-3 against better teams and Johnson was 2-1. I know, can't count the Bears game, but to be honest, I think Minnesota at home probably could have taken the Bears at full strength.

 

[Maelstrom]

Culpepper was struggling. Plain and simple. He was having a hard time adjusting to having to carry the load of the offense. What bothers me is people want to say that his struggles is what lost those games, and that just isn't true. Obviously he didn't help win them either, as a player at his caliber should do, but it was most definately a team and coaching letdown. Even if CPep played great, I think he woulda been hard pressed to win some/most of those games.

I haven't been calling for any high draft picks or trades - I think it would be a mistake to cut him loose at this point - definately selling low, value wise. But, I also think the media has blown this way out of scale with rumors and such. The Vikings coach came out and said they haven't discussed releasing CPep and Pep has offered to delay his bonus to help with the salary cap. He was quoted as saying something to the effect of - he wants to win a championship and would prefer to do it in Minn.

I hope Culpepper comes back stronger than ever and performs back at the 2004 level. I think he can. Whether he does or not, and whether that is in Minn, we'll just have to wait and see.

 

[BlueOnion]

The Vikings coach came out and said they haven't discussed releasing CPep and Pep has offered to delay his bonus to help with the salary cap. He was quoted as saying something to the effect of - he wants to win a championship and would prefer to do it in Minn.

You should reread this article, it was a little fishy. There were a few direct quotes from Daunte and two in particular which intrigued.First one was something in regards to what you said, "The Viking management has told me they have discussed no trades with other teams." However, later in the article Culpepper says, "I am not thinking about anything but rehabing right now, I am trying to get myself ready to play next year, where ever that is." For a guy who just got off the phone with the owner who apparently insisted their were no trade talks, I thought it odd Culpepper was not more adament about getting ready to play next year with the Vikings.

 

[Norseman]

I understand your point, but Johnson was 7-2 and Culpepper was 2-5 when they were the starters. The main reason is that Culpepper lost 4 games by himself. He threw 12 INTs in 5 losses in which his team was down 95-10 at half time because of his mistakes. The turnovers aren't anywhere close and that it were the comparison falls apart to me.

I strongly disagree. Lets look at the two different schedules:

With Culpepper

L Tampa Bay

L at Cincinnati

W New Orleans

L at Atlanta

L at Chicago

W Green Bay

L at Carolina

With Johnson

W Detroit

W at NY Giants

W Cleveland

W at Detroit

W St. Louis

L Pittsburgh

L at Baltimore

W Chicago (no starters, no bold)

I bolded the playoff teams.

I don't know how you can compare Detroit, Detroit, Cleveland, Green Bay, St. Louis and Chicago (with no starters) to the likes of Carolina, Chicago, Tampa Bay and Cincinnati.

Even with that, I would say Johnson was better. He at least was in one winning game against a playoff team, even if you want to discount Chicago. You are ignoring the fact that Minny wasn't even in the games against the good opponents, or even in the game against Atlanta. Who cares if Johnson beat bad or OK teams, he still won those games.CPepp was outscored 95-10 in the first half and 157-47 against the teams that you are lauding. He wasn't even in the game until padding some yardage in the second halves. At that point, Minny was pretty much playing the worst football in the league and luckily got to play 2 of the bottom 5 teams. How is that comparable to Johnson who went 7-2 as a starter? Seattle had a crap easy schedule, so what, they got to the Super Bowl.

This is the same as taking out the "long run" in the stats of a player. CPepp played about as bad as a QB has played. If you are playing well, you should win at a least one game

Johnson's performance in the win against the Giants wasn't the reason that they won that game. The offense scored 3 points, while the defense and special teams scored 21. Johnson had very little to do with that win.

I understand and agree, but that is like the post above that Culpepper's 12 INTs weren't really bad either, and I never even discussed the 5 fumbles in the 7 starts either. 17 turnovers in basically 6 games has to have an impact especially since all but 1 were in the 4 losses that CPepp played the whole game.Also, in that Giants game, Minnesota had 2 missed FGs and a Michael Bennett fumble and the Giants offense had almost 30 more plays. Hard to score a lot on offense when you never get the ball back because your special teams/defense scores 3 times.

I still don't understand how anyone can compare a guy (just 2005 mind you) who had 17 turnovers and 1 TD pass in 5 losses and had 1 turnover and 5 TD passes against 2 teams that were a combined 7-25 to a guy who was 7-2 as a starter. I am not comparing fantasy numbers of previous years, just 2005 NFL results.

Minnesota's offense was very pathetic in this game. Johnson was 17-30 for 144 yards, and the team rushed 21 times for 12 yards. To give the offense credit for the win is crazy. The defense forced 5 turnovers. Hard to score a lot on offense when you average less than 1 yard per carry and less than 5 yards per attempted pass.

 

[nightshift]

Fins will sign Brees before St. Patty's day.

 

[fatness]

Childress says teams have contacted Vikings about trading for Culpepper

Posted on Sat, Feb. 25, 2006

Coach Brad Childress acknowledged for the first time Friday that the Vikings have spoken to other teams about a possible trade involving quarterback Daunte Culpepper. Childress said the Vikings did not initiate any of the discussions and the team has not ruled out releasing or trading its three-time Pro Bowl quarterback. "You know, the phone rings both ways," Childress said during a news conference at the NFL scouting combine. "You don't not talk to people when they call.

"So we've had inquiries. I mean, that's what happens this time of year. So you listen to everything that's going on and find out what's subterfuge and kind of go from there."

Childress was asked if the Vikings were shopping Culpepper or if other teams were contacting Minnesota to gauge the quarterback's availability. "I would say it's probably the latter," Childress said. "I've had a couple phone calls myself. I can't speak for anybody else."

Childress' comments contradict a statement Culpepper issued Thursday, as well as multiple published reports that the Vikings initiated discussions with other clubs. Referring to a conversation he had with owner Zygi Wilf on Tuesday, Culpepper said, "(Wilf) told me that the Vikings have not yet spoken to other teams about trading me." Wilf was unavailable for comment, and Culpepper declined comment.

On Friday, Childress passed on several chances to quash the speculation surrounding Culpepper and did not dismiss the possibility of releasing the quarterback. Culpepper is coming off a devastating injury; he tore three ligaments in his right knee. "You don't ever say never at this time of year," said Childress, who spoke to Culpepper by phone Wednesday. "Never and always are two long periods of time."

 

[Footballhead]

About 2-3 seasons ago, Gus Ferrotte played as the starter when C-pep was the starter and he lit up the offense with 3 TD pass to Moss, IIRC. His post game comment was something alike this, "with a WR like Moss, you just have to throw it up high and you know he'll be open and catch it". I honestly think QB's like C-pep and K Collins do not desrve to have a great WR like Moss playing for them. C-pep is overrated, he he for years had the luxury of a young Moss lining up on one side who actually made the defensive reads easy. Without Moss, C-pep weaknesses became apparent, he can't hide from them and he's struggled greatly in the first 7 games. I think the VIkings need to go another direction and get someone like D. Brees throwing for them.

 

[BlueOnion]

About 2-3 seasons ago, Gus Ferrotte played as the starter when C-pep was the starter and he lit up the offense with 3 TD pass to Moss, IIRC. His post game comment was something alike this, "with a WR like Moss, you just have to throw it up high and you know he'll be open and catch it".

This has always been my #1 reason why Moss is the greatest wide receiver ever to play the game; Moss single-handedly got Gus Ferotte a perfect quarterback rating for one game.