Dolphins waiting for CPepp to be cut (1 Viewer)

[FreeBaGeL]

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.

It's one thing to go 17-30 for 144 yards, it's another to go 17-30 for 144 yards and NO TURNOVERS.Brad Johnson didn't win many games for the Vikes, but he gave the rest of his guys a chance to win them. Culpepper didn't just not win them, he didn't give anyone else on the team a chance.

 

[TheRegulator]

Couple comments-

First--There is pretty much zero chance Culpepper will be cut. Wilf doesn't strike me as someone so cheap to cut Culpepper over this measely roster bonus. You have a "former" franchise QB--he's worth much more than 6M--even with the injury concerns. Somebody will give up decent draft picks for the "chance" of obtaining a franchise QB--even if the Vikes don't think he can return to 2004 form.

Second--BJ is nothing more than a servicable back-up. Anyone thinking he is anything more than a fill-in is kidding themselves. Even when Johnson was winning SuperBowls in Tampa, it was because he limited mistakes and let the defense win. Last year when BJ took over, the TEAM turned their season around, not just the QB. The defense in particular got better partly from jelling, partly from facing lesser competition. I will bring up the Cincy game as an example of how Culpepper didn't lose the games on his own. Culpepper had a final line of 21-37 236 0 5. Looks like a brutal line, but if you watched the game and saw Cincy break out to a 27-0 1H lead thanks 1 INT by Culpepper, but also a fumble byM. Bennett and a defense that couldn't stop a high school team. 4 of Culpepper's INTs were in the 2H playing from behind forcing throws into coverage. I am not going to argue that Culpepper won't take more chances than Johnson, but Johnson also has no chance of LEADING this team anywhere. He might allow the defense/special teams to win a few games, but last I checked this defense is not good enough to carry the team every week. We don't have any other playmakers on offense to pick up the slack. The Vikings need to do something between either committing to Culpepper for a mid-season return and hopefully breaking even with Johnson until then or to go a different direction and sign Brees or somebody else.

 

[Maelstrom]

Couple comments-

First--There is pretty much zero chance Culpepper will be cut. Wilf doesn't strike me as someone so cheap to cut Culpepper over this measely roster bonus. You have a "former" franchise QB--he's worth much more than 6M--even with the injury concerns. Somebody will give up decent draft picks for the "chance" of obtaining a franchise QB--even if the Vikes don't think he can return to 2004 form.

Second--BJ is nothing more than a servicable back-up. Anyone thinking he is anything more than a fill-in is kidding themselves. Even when Johnson was winning SuperBowls in Tampa, it was because he limited mistakes and let the defense win. Last year when BJ took over, the TEAM turned their season around, not just the QB. The defense in particular got better partly from jelling, partly from facing lesser competition. I will bring up the Cincy game as an example of how Culpepper didn't lose the games on his own. Culpepper had a final line of 21-37 236 0 5. Looks like a brutal line, but if you watched the game and saw Cincy break out to a 27-0 1H lead thanks 1 INT by Culpepper, but also a fumble byM. Bennett and a defense that couldn't stop a high school team. 4 of Culpepper's INTs were in the 2H playing from behind forcing throws into coverage. I am not going to argue that Culpepper won't take more chances than Johnson, but Johnson also has no chance of LEADING this team anywhere. He might allow the defense/special teams to win a few games, but last I checked this defense is not good enough to carry the team every week. We don't have any other playmakers on offense to pick up the slack. The Vikings need to do something between either committing to Culpepper for a mid-season return and hopefully breaking even with Johnson until then or to go a different direction and sign Brees or somebody else.

Both points very true.

 

[HeirCoryell]

The fact that you are even having to debate over who is the better QB, between Culpepper and Johnson, should tell you something about Culpepper's worth.

 

[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.

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.

I don't think anyone on this thread is saying Culpepper played well last year; he didn't. What I am saying is that I look at the body of work and make a prediction of future performance. There were unusual circumstances last year that make me feel that last year was not the norm for Culpepper. C-Pep was great when Moss wasn't at full strength in 2004. I don't think he will play at that level, but I would bet he would be much better than last year. If you lined up QB's to play for your team for the next 4 years, I would see C-Pep going in the top 10 without question. Now think about how valuable the QB position is to the team? If you took a statistical look you would say that the QB is probably about 12% of the team. Support of last statement. Just taking offense at 40%, defense at 40% and special teams being at 20% (a reasonable figure believed by coaches). Now look at what % a QB is on the offense? How much is the LT worth, the RT, the center, and the 2 guards? What about the RB or the FB or the 2 WR's and the TE?...If you put % on each you will see that if you conclude the QB is 30% of the offense, then he is 12% of the team. 2 wr's and a TE is probably worth about 22% of the offense, the RB and FB are probably worth about 22% of the offense, all five lineman have to be worth about have to be worth at least 26% of the offense and that would leave the QB by himself worth 30% of the offense or 12% of the team. You can debate the numbers somewhat, but if anyone ever says a QB is worth more than 20% of the team, they don't understand how football is the ultimate team sport (unlike baseball where individual performances make up the teams effort). Sorry for the tangent...Bottom line is that if you have a bottom 3rd player at the most important position on the field (even if only 12% of the team) and you have the opportunity to get a top 1/3 player at a reasonable cost (The same as Reggie Wayne), you go ahead and get it done. Culpy is absolutely excellent value at 6 mil a year for the next 4 years.

 

[BlueOnion]

Wilf will get Culpepper his 6 million roster bonus

 

[Maelstrom]

From BlueOnion's link:

INDIANAPOLIS - Vikings owner Zygi Wilf said Saturday he plans to pay Daunte Culpepper a $6 million roster bonus on March 17 and tried to defuse growing speculation that the organization is going to sever ties with the quarterback by trading or releasing him.Asked if he could definitively say Culpepper was going to be on the Vikings roster in 2006, Wilf said: "That is our plan, yes. Always was." He reiterated that point in two follow-up questions.