Who Ends the Season Ranked Higher (1 Viewer)

[jurb26]

Culpepper was the #1 QB last year without Moss much of the season.

Huh? 3 games constitutes "much" of the season. If so, its rather startling that Moss managed to score 33% of Cpeps TDs having missed much of the season.... don't you think?Collins gets my vote. I see Cpep as a top QB still, but Collins looks primed for a sick year.

 

[Dancing Bear]

Yes, David in a matter of speaking Culpepper loses 25% and ends up at 320 [100 points lost actually], and Collins gains 25% and ends up at 300 [60 points gained].Yes based on the year as you suggest there is some variance with regards to where 300 points lands you. Only once did a QB land in the Top 5.I feel that Collins will have a very difficult time transforming further than he has. On top of displacing so many of this past years Top 15 QB's. Carson Palmer has the tools to join that crowd especially if Warrick comes back 100%. I also think that Holmgren will help Hasselbeck to rebound. McNair could pop back up there, and Jeff Garcia will have some real potential to come back into the Top 10.Some folks are forgetting that Moss will actually TAKE the place of an existing WR on the field. Curry, Gabriel, and Whitted did a fine job of stretching the field; it is not like Collins had a bunch of 2nd graders out there with him. These guys combined for many long TD plays [10 over 30 yards or more], over 1,600 yards receiving and 10 TD's. Moss is not going to just add to these numbers! On top of that in 1-1/2 games Gannon had 30% of these big play TD's. Collins used 14 full games and he barely doubled that output. On top of the fact that he FAILED to actually record any TD's in over 1/3 of the games!

 

[bagger.]

It is unbelievable the hype that goes on in this forum.Culpepper will easily outperform Collins.Looks like Collins will be the standard overhyped QB that all the sharks go after while solid top 10 QBs drop to the 5th and 6th round like Bulger or Brooks.This is a classic situaiton of everyone seeing Collins as a great pick if he was drafted the same place he was a year ago. Unfortunately he won't be and by the looks of it will probably be drafted in the 3rd or 4th.There will be a lot better choices in those rounds than Collins, especially if other QBs who will most likely perform better drop because of it.

 

[bagger.]

Some folks are forgetting that Moss will actually TAKE the place of an existing WR on the field. Curry, Gabriel, and Whitted did a fine job of stretching the field; it is not like Collins had a bunch of 2nd graders out there with him. These guys combined for many long TD plays [10 over 30 yards or more], over 1,600 yards receiving and 10 TD's. Moss is not going to just add to these numbers! On top of that in 1-1/2 games Gannon had 30% of these big play TD's. Collins used 14 full games and he barely doubled that output. On top of the fact that he FAILED to actually record any TD's in over 1/3 of the games!

This cannot be emphasized enough. Gabriel and Curry will suffer because of Moss' presence. One might get 500 yards, the other maybe 300.With Moss getting most likely 1,200 and Porter maybe cracking the 1k mark, that's about 1,100 yards to be allocated among the RBs, TEs, Gabriel, and Curry.

That's not a lot left.

People will overvalue Raiders' TEs again this year (as well as Curry and Gabriel).

Don't fall into that trap.

 

[bagger.]

People are also forgetting the damage that CPep does on the ground. That plays a large role.On a completely unrelated note, I really like Cedric Wilson to crack 1k this year in Pittsburgh.

 

[beef]

Looks like Collins will be the standard overhyped QB that all the sharks go after while solid top 10 QBs drop to the 5th and 6th round like Bulger or Brooks.

:rotflmao: You couldn't find a better QB to use as an example than Brooks.

On a completely unrelated note, I really like Cedric Wilson to crack 1k this year in Pittsburgh.

There is no crapping in the shark pool. Please take this back to the FFA.

 

[bostonfred]

This is going too far. I don't care if Collins has Moss, Harrison and Owens - he's not putting up more fantasy points than Culpepper. Culpepper was the #1 QB last year without Moss much of the season. Consistency is the key and it doesn't help to have a guy like Collins put up 40 points one week and come back with 5 the next. Collins had some good games last year but they were mostly against bad pass D's - Saints, Chargers, Broncos, Chiefs and Titans. Culpepper is a lock for 20 points regardless of who the Vikes play.

Did you look at his games without Moss?In his first game without Moss, Culpepper threw for 183 yards and one TD while rushing for 4 yards. I know you said "regardless of who the Vikes play", but this was against Tennessee, a "Great Matchup". I didn't do the math, but it looks like he was just shy of the 20 point mark in that game. Still it was his first without Moss, so we'll give him a mulligan.

He bounced back the next week with 231 yards, 1 TD and 2 INTs against the Giants. Even with his 32 rushing yards, that was a little south of the 20 points you said he was a lock for.

But don't worry, he had a great matchup the following week against Indianapolis. Sure, he didn't have Moss, but he put up a whopping 169 yards and a TD. His 27 rushing yards brought him into the double digits range, though, so it wasn't a complete waste.

He blew up against Green Bay, but he barely broke the 20 point mark against Detroit the following week.

He then bounced back and averaged almost 300 yards and more than 2 TDs a game the rest of the way once Moss came back. It's a small sample size, but his rush yards even went back up, and he scored his only rush TDs of the season while Moss was playing.

I'm absolutely amazed that people assume Culpepper's just going to overcome the loss of a player of Moss' caliber and continue to be a 320+ point QB, when the only evidence we have of Culpepper without Moss points to him struggling against the worst pass defenses in the league.

 

[cstu]

This is going too far.  I don't care if Collins has Moss, Harrison and Owens - he's not putting up more fantasy points than Culpepper.  Culpepper was the #1 QB last year without Moss much of the season.  Consistency is the key and it doesn't help to have a guy like Collins put up 40 points one week and come back with 5 the next.  Collins had some good games last year but they were mostly against bad pass D's - Saints, Chargers, Broncos, Chiefs and Titans.  Culpepper is a lock for 20 points regardless of who the Vikes play.

Did you look at his games without Moss?In his first game without Moss, Culpepper threw for 183 yards and one TD while rushing for 4 yards. I know you said "regardless of who the Vikes play", but this was against Tennessee, a "Great Matchup". I didn't do the math, but it looks like he was just shy of the 20 point mark in that game. Still it was his first without Moss, so we'll give him a mulligan.

He bounced back the next week with 231 yards, 1 TD and 2 INTs against the Giants. Even with his 32 rushing yards, that was a little south of the 20 points you said he was a lock for.

But don't worry, he had a great matchup the following week against Indianapolis. Sure, he didn't have Moss, but he put up a whopping 169 yards and a TD. His 27 rushing yards brought him into the double digits range, though, so it wasn't a complete waste.

He blew up against Green Bay, but he barely broke the 20 point mark against Detroit the following week.

He then bounced back and averaged almost 300 yards and more than 2 TDs a game the rest of the way once Moss came back. It's a small sample size, but his rush yards even went back up, and he scored his only rush TDs of the season while Moss was playing.

I'm absolutely amazed that people assume Culpepper's just going to overcome the loss of a player of Moss' caliber and continue to be a 320+ point QB, when the only evidence we have of Culpepper without Moss points to him struggling against the worst pass defenses in the league.

To be fair to Culpepper he has played with Moss his entire career and those games when Moss was out/playing injured (6-13) was the first time he had to adjust to playing without him. He struggled weeks 7-9 but then adjusted and did fine. I'm not saying that losing Moss doesn't hurt him but as long as the Vikes draft a top WR he'll be fine. Collins will put up good numbers but won't be as consistent as Culpepper and is a much bigger risk if he's drafted around QB #5.

 

[Family Matters]

This is going too far.  I don't care if Collins has Moss, Harrison and Owens - he's not putting up more fantasy points than Culpepper.  Culpepper was the #1 QB last year without Moss much of the season.  Consistency is the key and it doesn't help to have a guy like Collins put up 40 points one week and come back with 5 the next.  Collins had some good games last year but they were mostly against bad pass D's - Saints, Chargers, Broncos, Chiefs and Titans.  Culpepper is a lock for 20 points regardless of who the Vikes play.

Did you look at his games without Moss?In his first game without Moss, Culpepper threw for 183 yards and one TD while rushing for 4 yards. I know you said "regardless of who the Vikes play", but this was against Tennessee, a "Great Matchup". I didn't do the math, but it looks like he was just shy of the 20 point mark in that game. Still it was his first without Moss, so we'll give him a mulligan.

He bounced back the next week with 231 yards, 1 TD and 2 INTs against the Giants. Even with his 32 rushing yards, that was a little south of the 20 points you said he was a lock for.

But don't worry, he had a great matchup the following week against Indianapolis. Sure, he didn't have Moss, but he put up a whopping 169 yards and a TD. His 27 rushing yards brought him into the double digits range, though, so it wasn't a complete waste.

He blew up against Green Bay, but he barely broke the 20 point mark against Detroit the following week.

He then bounced back and averaged almost 300 yards and more than 2 TDs a game the rest of the way once Moss came back. It's a small sample size, but his rush yards even went back up, and he scored his only rush TDs of the season while Moss was playing.

I'm absolutely amazed that people assume Culpepper's just going to overcome the loss of a player of Moss' caliber and continue to be a 320+ point QB, when the only evidence we have of Culpepper without Moss points to him struggling against the worst pass defenses in the league.

You do make good points and it does appear that Cpep's number could go down. You base this on Moss leaving of course. Not sure what you are projecting for him but I thought it was interesting to also review 04 to 03.2003 Minnesota Vikings 14 14 454 295 65.0 3479 7.66 59 25 11 37/196 41 10 96.4

2004 Minnesota Vikings 16 16 548 379 69.2 4717 8.61 82 39 11 46/238 63 18 110.9

Not sure what your opinion is on what Cpep will do this year but even if he falls back to his '03 production he will still beat Collins once you add in his rushing totals. Also, Cpep missed 2 games in '03 due to the back injury or his numbers would of been a little higher.

Help me work through this because I found it interesting that in '03 when Moss was healthy and didn't miss any games Cpep's numbers were lower than in '04 when Moss did miss games. Based on your assertion Culpepper should of had a poor season in '04 when Moss was injured and missing games. Yet he had a career year. How does that support your theory that Moss leaving will drop Culpepper below Collins?

Based on your theory that Moss affects Cpep so dramatically then when Cpep had his best ever year why did Moss have his worst ever year? Yes, Moss was injured but then how did Cpep do it? Clearly we know that Moss was no where near 100% the rest of the season yet he continued to put up big numbers. How?

It's also interesting to note that before Moss became injured that except for TD's he was having his worse season since '01. He projected out to 83-1260-25. Of course that ain't bad by any stretch but how does Culpepper improve so dramatically and leave Moss having one of his worse seasons by his standards? The TD's were great but someone else was catching all those extra balls, not Moss.

BTW-the Tenn game that you point to Cpep as having a bad game, if you look at the game log you can see MN was manhandling them with Moore running all over them and protecting an early lead. And Cpep was 24/30. Not too bad considering.

So all in all I would say Moss leaving will have a negative impact but not so much that Cpep isn't still one of the elite QB's in the game. 1 player does not make or break a QB's career.

 

[4thAndForever]

The next poll question should be:"Who will win more games next season: New England or Arizona?"

 

[Family Matters]

This has been one of the more compelling debates this offseason and I certainly respect everyone's opinion. You can look at both of these players and make compelling arguments for each to do well or fall short of expectations. That's what make this board great.Around here you will get every perspective. Every angle will be evaluated, analyzed and regurgetated over and over.I can't wait to see how the staff approaches these 2 and the differing opinions that will be presented.

 

[ssnakeinc]

The key point in this is where each will end up being drafted. I think their stats will be argueably close. Culpepper will be better in leagues that reward TD's equally with Culp picking up points for rushing and rushing TD's. Collins I think has an advantage in leagues that reward longer TD's with bonus points, Moss and Porter are both big play guysBUTCulp will go in the middle/late of the first round where he always goes, Collins I see going in the 3rd sliding to the 4th sometimes. Tough to take him in the second I think. So I think the real question is would you rather have Culp and a mediocre RB core (you would almost be forced to go RB, RB in the 2nd and 3rd) or a strong RB core with Collins achoring you QB spot. :duel: I doudt you will see me taking Culp in the first this season.

 

[bostonfred]

This is going too far.  I don't care if Collins has Moss, Harrison and Owens - he's not putting up more fantasy points than Culpepper.  Culpepper was the #1 QB last year without Moss much of the season.  Consistency is the key and it doesn't help to have a guy like Collins put up 40 points one week and come back with 5 the next.  Collins had some good games last year but they were mostly against bad pass D's - Saints, Chargers, Broncos, Chiefs and Titans.  Culpepper is a lock for 20 points regardless of who the Vikes play.

Did you look at his games without Moss?In his first game without Moss, Culpepper threw for 183 yards and one TD while rushing for 4 yards. I know you said "regardless of who the Vikes play", but this was against Tennessee, a "Great Matchup". I didn't do the math, but it looks like he was just shy of the 20 point mark in that game. Still it was his first without Moss, so we'll give him a mulligan.

He bounced back the next week with 231 yards, 1 TD and 2 INTs against the Giants. Even with his 32 rushing yards, that was a little south of the 20 points you said he was a lock for.

But don't worry, he had a great matchup the following week against Indianapolis. Sure, he didn't have Moss, but he put up a whopping 169 yards and a TD. His 27 rushing yards brought him into the double digits range, though, so it wasn't a complete waste.

He blew up against Green Bay, but he barely broke the 20 point mark against Detroit the following week.

He then bounced back and averaged almost 300 yards and more than 2 TDs a game the rest of the way once Moss came back. It's a small sample size, but his rush yards even went back up, and he scored his only rush TDs of the season while Moss was playing.

I'm absolutely amazed that people assume Culpepper's just going to overcome the loss of a player of Moss' caliber and continue to be a 320+ point QB, when the only evidence we have of Culpepper without Moss points to him struggling against the worst pass defenses in the league.

You do make good points and it does appear that Cpep's number could go down. You base this on Moss leaving of course. Not sure what you are projecting for him but I thought it was interesting to also review 04 to 03.2003 Minnesota Vikings 14 14 454 295 65.0 3479 7.66 59 25 11 37/196 41 10 96.4

2004 Minnesota Vikings 16 16 548 379 69.2 4717 8.61 82 39 11 46/238 63 18 110.9

Not sure what your opinion is on what Cpep will do this year but even if he falls back to his '03 production he will still beat Collins once you add in his rushing totals. Also, Cpep missed 2 games in '03 due to the back injury or his numbers would of been a little higher.

Why would you assume that he falls back to his production in a year when he had Moss? We have no basis for comparison here except the games Moss missed, and that's spotty at best.

Help me work through this because I found it interesting that in '03 when Moss was healthy and didn't miss any games Cpep's numbers were lower than in '04 when Moss did miss games. Based on your assertion Culpepper should of had a poor season in '04 when Moss was injured and missing games. Yet he had a career year. How does that support your theory that Moss leaving will drop Culpepper below Collins?

Based on your theory that Moss affects Cpep so dramatically then when Cpep had his best ever year why did Moss have his worst ever year? Yes, Moss was injured but then how did Cpep do it? Clearly we know that Moss was no where near 100% the rest of the season yet he continued to put up big numbers. How?

Culpepper had a ridiculous 18 TDs through his first 5 games. Think about that - he was blowing away Manning's pace. Moss had 8 of them. Moss gets hurt, Culpepper throws for a total of three TDs in his next three games. He blows up against Green Bay, has an unspectacular game against Detroit, and then heats back up again when Moss returns. During that time, Moss catches a TD in every game but one. In summary, there were three parts of the season. Moss healthy - Culpepper tremendous. Moss hurt - Culpepper sucks. Moss gimpy - Culpepper good again, but not as good as when Moss was completely healthy.

Look at their 2004 game logs, it's really compelling:

Moss 2004 game log

Culpepper 2004 game log

It's also interesting to note that before Moss became injured that except for TD's he was having his worse season since '01. He projected out to 83-1260-25. Of course that ain't bad by any stretch but how does Culpepper improve so dramatically and leave Moss having one of his worse seasons by his standards? The TD's were great but someone else was catching all those extra balls, not Moss.

Except for the TDs? He was on pace for 25 TDs with 8 in his first 5 games. His receptions and yards may have been down, but that's because the Vikings were killing teams on both sides of the football until Moss went down.

BTW-the Tenn game that you point to Cpep as having a bad game, if you look at the game log you can see MN was manhandling them with Moore running all over them and protecting an early lead. And Cpep was 24/30. Not too bad considering.

So you're saying that, without Moss, the Vikings went to a ball control, run based offense, and Culpepper's fantasy stats suffered. In 2005, without Moss, the Vikings have stated that they want to move to a ball control, run based offense. Do you see why that's not good for Culpepper's fantasy numbers?

So all in all I would say Moss leaving will have a negative impact but not so much that Cpep isn't still one of the elite QB's in the game. 1 player does not make or break a QB's career.

Here's an example of 1 player making or breaking a QBs career:With great WR(*): 16 games, 4387 passing, 34 TDs, 9 INTs, 251 rush, 3 rush td

Without great WR: 16 game, 3216 passing, 16 TDs, 11 INTs, 355 rush, 3 rush td

That great QB was McNabb. The great WR was Owens. Note that those numbers are prorated from the 14 games that McNabb started to a full 16 game season (this seems fair because he was benched for playoff rest; I also subtracted out his 3 passes for 36 yards and a TD that he got in his 15th game).

By the way, McNabb's worst game passing was the Dallas game when Owens got hurt, and his numbers in the playoffs, while good, improved significantly when Owens came back, despite playing the Patriots who had crushed opposing playoff QBs in back to back games.

So we don't have a lot of evidence of what happens when QBs gain/lose a top WR. But everything we DO have points to a huge gain when that top WR arrives, and a huge dropoff when he leaves. And that passes the logic test, which says that a top WR opens up the offense and catches a lot of balls himself.

For fun, let's apply the same pro rating that we saw with McNabb without Owens, to Culpepper without Moss:

McNabb prorated 2005: 4387/34/9, 251/3 rush

McNabb actual 2004: 3216 passing, 16 TDs, 11 INTs, 355 rush, 3 rush td

Projected change due to Owens:

x.73 pass yards

x.47 TDs

x1.22 INTs

x1.41 rushyd < It seems people are right to expect his rushing to go up

x1 rushTD

Let's apply those numbers to Culpepper:

Culpepper actual 2005: 4717/39/11, 406/2 rush

Culpepper projected 2006: 3457 passing, 18 TDs, 13 INTs, 574 rush, 2 rush TD

That would put him at 289 fantasy points in a 1/25 passing, 6 pt passing TDs, -2/INT, 1/10 rush, 6 pt rush TDs scoring system, which is certainly not worth a first round pick.

 

[radballs.]

Fred,In conclusion, is that your projection for Culpepper's FP this year? I'd bet my house on the over.

 

[jwvdcw]

This is going too far. I don't care if Collins has Moss, Harrison and Owens - he's not putting up more fantasy points than Culpepper. Culpepper was the #1 QB last year without Moss much of the season. Consistency is the key and it doesn't help to have a guy like Collins put up 40 points one week and come back with 5 the next. Collins had some good games last year but they were mostly against bad pass D's - Saints, Chargers, Broncos, Chiefs and Titans. Culpepper is a lock for 20 points regardless of who the Vikes play.

Care to actually look at the facts?Would you say that Brad Johnson or Jeff George or Randall Cunningham were better FF QBs than Culpepper?

Well, those QBs with Moss put up MUCH better numbers than Culpepper did without Moss.

What do those QBs have that Collins doesn't???

 

[jwvdcw]

jewvdicv is Pinner's and Collin's agent???

I want in on the sig bet too.

you're in.But I think you're totally 100% missing my point. I'm not pimping Collins at all. I think hes a very very average QB from a fantasy standpoint just like Brad Johnson, Jeff George, Randall Randall Randall Cunningham at the end of his career, and Daunte Culpepper. Moss has and will make any average QB a great FF QB. He has proven he can do this. Moss is the player that I'm talking up in this thread, not Collins.

 

[jwvdcw]

Yes, David in a matter of speaking Culpepper loses 25% and ends up at 320 [100 points lost actually], and Collins gains 25% and ends up at 300 [60 points gained].

Yes based on the year as you suggest there is some variance with regards to where 300 points lands you. Only once did a QB land in the Top 5.

I feel that Collins will have a very difficult time transforming further than he has. On top of displacing so many of this past years Top 15 QB's. Carson Palmer has the tools to join that crowd especially if Warrick comes back 100%. I also think that Holmgren will help Hasselbeck to rebound. McNair could pop back up there, and Jeff Garcia will have some real potential to come back into the Top 10.

Some folks are forgetting that Moss will actually TAKE the place of an existing WR on the field. Curry, Gabriel, and Whitted did a fine job of stretching the field; it is not like Collins had a bunch of 2nd graders out there with him. These guys combined for many long TD plays [10 over 30 yards or more], over 1,600 yards receiving and 10 TD's. Moss is not going to just add to these numbers! On top of that in 1-1/2 games Gannon had 30% of these big play TD's. Collins used 14 full games and he barely doubled that output. On top of the fact that he FAILED to actually record any TD's in over 1/3 of the games!

Please tell me you're not comparing Curry, Gabriel, and 'Whitted' to Randy Moss. Moss will change the game like no other. Those 3 are some very average WRs who could easily be out of the league in a year or two. Moss will totally change the Oakland offense. MOSS HAS MADE EVERY SINGLE QB THAT HE HAS PLAYED WITH FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME A TOP 3 QB. MY QUESTION TO YOU IS THIS: WHAT ABOUT KERRY COLLINS IS SO TERRIBLY BAD THAT MOSS CAN'T DO FOR HIM WHAT HE HAS DONE FOR EVERYONE ELSE???

 

[jwvdcw]

It is unbelievable the hype that goes on in this forum.

Culpepper will easily outperform Collins.

Looks like Collins will be the standard overhyped QB that all the sharks go after while solid top 10 QBs drop to the 5th and 6th round like Bulger or Brooks.

This is a classic situaiton of everyone seeing Collins as a great pick if he was drafted the same place he was a year ago. Unfortunately he won't be and by the looks of it will probably be drafted in the 3rd or 4th.

There will be a lot better choices in those rounds than Collins, especially if other QBs who will most likely perform better drop because of it.

In my personal opinion, hype = a lot of people thinking someone can do something, but it is totally unproven. Randy Moss has PROVEN imo that he can make any QB a great FF QB. That is not 'hype', that is proven reality.

 

[jwvdcw]

Some folks are forgetting that Moss will actually TAKE the place of an existing WR on the field.  Curry, Gabriel, and Whitted did a fine job of stretching the field; it is not like Collins had a bunch of 2nd graders out there with him.  These guys combined for many long TD plays [10 over 30 yards or more], over 1,600 yards receiving and 10 TD's.  Moss is not going to just add to these numbers!  On top of that in 1-1/2 games Gannon had 30% of these big play TD's.  Collins used 14 full games and he barely doubled that output.  On top of the fact that he FAILED to actually record any TD's in over 1/3 of the games!

This cannot be emphasized enough. Gabriel and Curry will suffer because of Moss' presence. One might get 500 yards, the other maybe 300.With Moss getting most likely 1,200 and Porter maybe cracking the 1k mark, that's about 1,100 yards to be allocated among the RBs, TEs, Gabriel, and Curry.

That's not a lot left.

People will overvalue Raiders' TEs again this year (as well as Curry and Gabriel).

Don't fall into that trap.

Jeez, can you all please take one second to look up some stats to actually support your opinions before throwing out these silly arguements. Not counting his injury plagued last year, Randy Moss has gone over 1200 yards in every single one of his years as a pro and he has only had one year under 1300. Yet he is "most likely" to just get 1200 now? In his rookie year he put up 1313!!! And now in the prime of his career, hes "most likely" to get just 1200. Great logic.

 

[jwvdcw]

This is going too far.  I don't care if Collins has Moss, Harrison and Owens - he's not putting up more fantasy points than Culpepper.  Culpepper was the #1 QB last year without Moss much of the season.  Consistency is the key and it doesn't help to have a guy like Collins put up 40 points one week and come back with 5 the next.  Collins had some good games last year but they were mostly against bad pass D's - Saints, Chargers, Broncos, Chiefs and Titans.  Culpepper is a lock for 20 points regardless of who the Vikes play.

Did you look at his games without Moss?In his first game without Moss, Culpepper threw for 183 yards and one TD while rushing for 4 yards. I know you said "regardless of who the Vikes play", but this was against Tennessee, a "Great Matchup". I didn't do the math, but it looks like he was just shy of the 20 point mark in that game. Still it was his first without Moss, so we'll give him a mulligan.

He bounced back the next week with 231 yards, 1 TD and 2 INTs against the Giants. Even with his 32 rushing yards, that was a little south of the 20 points you said he was a lock for.

But don't worry, he had a great matchup the following week against Indianapolis. Sure, he didn't have Moss, but he put up a whopping 169 yards and a TD. His 27 rushing yards brought him into the double digits range, though, so it wasn't a complete waste.

He blew up against Green Bay, but he barely broke the 20 point mark against Detroit the following week.

He then bounced back and averaged almost 300 yards and more than 2 TDs a game the rest of the way once Moss came back. It's a small sample size, but his rush yards even went back up, and he scored his only rush TDs of the season while Moss was playing.

I'm absolutely amazed that people assume Culpepper's just going to overcome the loss of a player of Moss' caliber and continue to be a 320+ point QB, when the only evidence we have of Culpepper without Moss points to him struggling against the worst pass defenses in the league.

Great posting. Wow, its amazing what the facts will do to somebody's argument.I find it hilarious that I've been accused of 2 people of fishing here, yet I continue to bring up fact after fact after fact, while others just spew info like "Culpepper did great without Moss" and "Moss will most likely only have 1200 yards receiving" and saying that Collins won't put up great numbers because he historically hasn't(as if Brad Johnson and Jeff George had always put up great numbers without Moss).

Ladies and gentlemen, I am bringing the facts. I'M BRINGING IT!!! Now, sit down and crap your lumpy crap all together and jump on it!

 

[jwvdcw]

I'm not saying that losing Moss doesn't hurt him but as long as the Vikes draft a top WR he'll be fine.

Need I remind you that only about 1 out of 10 rookie WRs are even decent fantasy options, yet alone ready to make up for the loss of Randy Moss. Rookie WRs struggle early on. If the Vikes are really counting on rookie to be their top option, then they're in trouble imo. Personally, I think that the Vikes are done with the air it out/no defense approach. I think that they'll play to their strengths, which is their ground game. I think they'll try to control the game with their potent RBBC and that their defense will be improved a ton this year. Sleeper fantasy defense= Vikings!

 

[jwvdcw]

This is going too far.  I don't care if Collins has Moss, Harrison and Owens - he's not putting up more fantasy points than Culpepper.  Culpepper was the #1 QB last year without Moss much of the season.  Consistency is the key and it doesn't help to have a guy like Collins put up 40 points one week and come back with 5 the next.  Collins had some good games last year but they were mostly against bad pass D's - Saints, Chargers, Broncos, Chiefs and Titans.  Culpepper is a lock for 20 points regardless of who the Vikes play.

Did you look at his games without Moss?In his first game without Moss, Culpepper threw for 183 yards and one TD while rushing for 4 yards. I know you said "regardless of who the Vikes play", but this was against Tennessee, a "Great Matchup". I didn't do the math, but it looks like he was just shy of the 20 point mark in that game. Still it was his first without Moss, so we'll give him a mulligan.

He bounced back the next week with 231 yards, 1 TD and 2 INTs against the Giants. Even with his 32 rushing yards, that was a little south of the 20 points you said he was a lock for.

But don't worry, he had a great matchup the following week against Indianapolis. Sure, he didn't have Moss, but he put up a whopping 169 yards and a TD. His 27 rushing yards brought him into the double digits range, though, so it wasn't a complete waste.

He blew up against Green Bay, but he barely broke the 20 point mark against Detroit the following week.

He then bounced back and averaged almost 300 yards and more than 2 TDs a game the rest of the way once Moss came back. It's a small sample size, but his rush yards even went back up, and he scored his only rush TDs of the season while Moss was playing.

I'm absolutely amazed that people assume Culpepper's just going to overcome the loss of a player of Moss' caliber and continue to be a 320+ point QB, when the only evidence we have of Culpepper without Moss points to him struggling against the worst pass defenses in the league.

You do make good points and it does appear that Cpep's number could go down. You base this on Moss leaving of course. Not sure what you are projecting for him but I thought it was interesting to also review 04 to 03.2003 Minnesota Vikings 14 14 454 295 65.0 3479 7.66 59 25 11 37/196 41 10 96.4

2004 Minnesota Vikings 16 16 548 379 69.2 4717 8.61 82 39 11 46/238 63 18 110.9

Not sure what your opinion is on what Cpep will do this year but even if he falls back to his '03 production he will still beat Collins once you add in his rushing totals. Also, Cpep missed 2 games in '03 due to the back injury or his numbers would of been a little higher.

Help me work through this because I found it interesting that in '03 when Moss was healthy and didn't miss any games Cpep's numbers were lower than in '04 when Moss did miss games. Based on your assertion Culpepper should of had a poor season in '04 when Moss was injured and missing games. Yet he had a career year. How does that support your theory that Moss leaving will drop Culpepper below Collins?

Based on your theory that Moss affects Cpep so dramatically then when Cpep had his best ever year why did Moss have his worst ever year? Yes, Moss was injured but then how did Cpep do it? Clearly we know that Moss was no where near 100% the rest of the season yet he continued to put up big numbers. How?

It's also interesting to note that before Moss became injured that except for TD's he was having his worse season since '01. He projected out to 83-1260-25. Of course that ain't bad by any stretch but how does Culpepper improve so dramatically and leave Moss having one of his worse seasons by his standards? The TD's were great but someone else was catching all those extra balls, not Moss.

BTW-the Tenn game that you point to Cpep as having a bad game, if you look at the game log you can see MN was manhandling them with Moore running all over them and protecting an early lead. And Cpep was 24/30. Not too bad considering.

So all in all I would say Moss leaving will have a negative impact but not so much that Cpep isn't still one of the elite QB's in the game. 1 player does not make or break a QB's career.

Your analysis of Culpepper is somewhat accurate imo, but your analysis of Collins is not. Moss has made every QB hes played with a top 3 FF QB. Why won't he do that for Collins? Or at the very least, why won't he make Collins top 5?

 

[KevT]

Wow, the poll really surpises me. I thought that it would closer to 50/50. Collins and Porter really started clicking last year, add Moss to the mix and a capable RB, and I see Collins having a much better year than Culpepper. All we really can go by right now, is the games played without Moss. And Bostonfred made a good post about how "well" Culpepper did.

 

[bostonfred]

Fred,

In conclusion, is that your projection for Culpepper's FP this year? I'd bet my house on the over.

Of course not. In fact, I don't "project" Culpepper's stats to be anything. I don't think you can, so I assign an upside, downside, and most likely case, and ballpark how likely I think each is. I've been pretty clear throughout the offseason that I think Culpepper will be in the top ten, and I think it's possible for him to be top 3. I just don't think it's likely enough that he'll be a top 3 QB to justify taking him in the second round.

I just want to show that there's a very recent case, the only time in recent memory that a WR of Moss' caliber has changed teams, where a massive change occurred. Which shows that the conservative dropoffs - "Worst case, he's still top 5" - are far from accurate.

Which is why I think he's a terrible value in the first or second round. Because he'd have to perform to his upside just to earn back his draft position, and because there are several other QBs who could exceed their draft position.

If you want an over under, though, I'd set it at 28.5 TDs. I'll take the under. Want in?

 

[jwvdcw]

1 player does not make or break a QB's career.

Not a bad overall post, but I totally disagree with this from a fantasy perspective. I've already shown in great detail how Moss has helped numerous QBs, then you have how Owens has helped Garcia, how Owens has helped McNabb, how Rice helped Bono and Grbac, and so on and so on.

 

[jwvdcw]

BTW-the Tenn game that you point to Cpep as having a bad game, if you look at the game log you can see MN was manhandling them with Moore running all over them and protecting an early lead. And Cpep was 24/30. Not too bad considering.

So you're saying that, without Moss, the Vikings went to a ball control, run based offense, and Culpepper's fantasy stats suffered. In 2005, without Moss, the Vikings have stated that they want to move to a ball control, run based offense. Do you see why that's not good for Culpepper's fantasy numbers?

Absolutely great posting. I love it when somebody takes someone else's words or stats and uses it against them(see my link to the other thread where I provied numerous examples of this )

 

[Mr. Vegas]

With all the hype lately, I figured we might as well throw this one out there . . .

I have Collins,but Culpepper is the 2nd or 3rd best QB.Where as Collins is maybe 10th best QB.

So I picked Culpepper.

 

[radballs.]

Fred,

In conclusion, is that your projection for Culpepper's FP this year?  I'd bet my house on the over.

Of course not. In fact, I don't "project" Culpepper's stats to be anything. I don't think you can, so I assign an upside, downside, and most likely case, and ballpark how likely I think each is. I've been pretty clear throughout the offseason that I think Culpepper will be in the top ten, and I think it's possible for him to be top 3. I just don't think it's likely enough that he'll be a top 3 QB to justify taking him in the second round.

I just want to show that there's a very recent case, the only time in recent memory that a WR of Moss' caliber has changed teams, where a massive change occurred. Which shows that the conservative dropoffs - "Worst case, he's still top 5" - are far from accurate.

Which is why I think he's a terrible value in the first or second round. Because he'd have to perform to his upside just to earn back his draft position, and because there are several other QBs who could exceed their draft position.

If you want an over under, though, I'd set it at 28.5 TDs. I'll take the under. Want in?

Total TDs? Yeah, I'll take the over. But, I agree with you that Culpepper is/will go way too early. I'm a member of the camp though that Culpepper will still be a great player despite losing his best weapon but there should be a slight dip in his production. Moss will make Collins a slightly better QB, but Moss won't quite be the player he was with Culpepper. People are going to extremes in this thread. By slight, I mean within 20% of past FP production.

 

[cstu]

This is going too far.  I don't care if Collins has Moss, Harrison and Owens - he's not putting up more fantasy points than Culpepper.  Culpepper was the #1 QB last year without Moss much of the season.  Consistency is the key and it doesn't help to have a guy like Collins put up 40 points one week and come back with 5 the next.  Collins had some good games last year but they were mostly against bad pass D's - Saints, Chargers, Broncos, Chiefs and Titans.  Culpepper is a lock for 20 points regardless of who the Vikes play.

Care to actually look at the facts?Would you say that Brad Johnson or Jeff George or Randall Cunningham were better FF QBs than Culpepper?

Well, those QBs with Moss put up MUCH better numbers than Culpepper did without Moss.

What do those QBs have that Collins doesn't???

Let's look at two things from a fantasy perspective:1) Collins does not run the ball. In FF this has a huge impact on points for a QB and is the reason your guy Vick even gets drafted. Culpepper may not gain huge yards every game or get a TD, but what he does get usually makes up for him having off days. When Collins has an off day passing you are usually screwed.

2) The difference between Collins and all the other Vikings QB's is that it's Moss switching teams, not just another QB throwing the ball. When Moss played with those guys it didn't matter - he just went out and ran his plays and hoped the ball was there. Now he's going to go to a new team and have to learn a new playbook plus build chemistry with Collins. With all the new weapons in OAK Collins does look appealing, but he's nothing fool's gold if taken as a top 5 pick.

 

[Family Matters]

BTW-the Tenn game that you point to Cpep as having a bad game, if you look at the game log you can see MN was manhandling them with Moore running all over them and protecting an early lead. And Cpep was 24/30. Not too bad considering.

So you're saying that, without Moss, the Vikings went to a ball control, run based offense, and Culpepper's fantasy stats suffered. In 2005, without Moss, the Vikings have stated that they want to move to a ball control, run based offense. Do you see why that's not good for Culpepper's fantasy numbers?

Absolutely great posting. I love it when somebody takes someone else's words or stats and uses it against them(see my link to the other thread where I provied numerous examples of this )

I really wanted to avoid making this post but I just can'y help it. After all you and bostonfred made the comments so here we go:Answer this question:

"How many teams throw the ball extensively in the 2nd half while nursing a 20 pt lead when the opponet cannot stop your running game?"

Answer:very few. Why? Because they play to win and protecting big leads in the 2nd half is common practice for "most" teams. 'Cmon guys. We're talking football 101 here.

 

[Dancing Bear]

First and foremost, let me say that I think Moss is among the best WR to have ever played [Certainly in the same company of Hutson and Rice] from both a Fantasy and a NFL perspective. His play has certainly attracted Defensive attention and altered the oppositions game plan.However, I must point out that all the references to Moss MAKING Top 5 QB's are extremely flawed.In 1998, 1999, and 2000 the Vikings Offense had one of the most POTENT threesomes to ever play the game in Smith, Carter, and Moss. As many have pointed out it really did not matter who played QB during this era. This is a function of Carter, Dennis Green, the O-Coordinator, the players in place, and their execution. This is not a function of Moss alone; he was an integral part of a TEAM.In 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 Moss has been an integral part of the TEAM in Minnesota. They have been fortunate to regularly have a healthy QB, a sound O-Line, a stable of capable RB's, and they have continually executed to score points. Lots of points. They have continually rushed for better than a 4.5 ypc. Culpepper has regularly been among the league leaders in yards, ypa, ypc and nearly all other QB stats. Minnesota's Offensive success, Culpepper's success and Moss' success were a function of the TEAM executing and taking advantage of their collective abilities.Culpepper has missed just 6 games as a starter; 4 in 2001 and 2 in 2003. Claiming that Moss MAKES a Top 5 QB in either of these two cases is flawed as well. The sample size in either case is extremely SMALL. In Frerotte's case in 2003, you are also ignoring the fact that the TEAM was functioning on all cylinders. The TEAM contributed to his nearly 700 yards in 2 games, 7 TD's, a ypa of over 10, and a ypc of over 18. Everyone executed in order for this to happen, not just Moss.With regards to Bouman in 2001 you have a larger sample size with 4 games, but Bouman's statistics are mid-range at best [800 yards in 4 games] and less than 20 ppg from a Fantasy perspective. This is not even close to Top 5 credentials.Claiming that Moss did all this [without the execution of the other 10 players on the field], and thus he will transform an already Pass-happy Oakland Offense is not logical to me.On top of the fact that it ignores the possible schism that Moss brings with regards to TEAM chemistry. I have played on many teams in my lifetime of sports, and on a few of these there was a designated "star". Do you know where the focus shifted? Away from TEAM and onto the "star". IMHO this reduced our potential against the opponents! Instead of maintaining a balance of play amongst everyone, a high level of esteem amongst everyone, a feeling of the "star" will do it arises. Folks actually LOST confidence and the TEAM suffered. Although I was SHOCKED to see Moss traded, the indicators of this sort of scenario are ALL there! Oakland beware!Although there is precedence for a WR who switches to have at least one year of decline, I do believe that Moss will follow in TO's path and have minimal decline.Until Oakland takes the first snap, there is no evidence that Moss can transform Collins from a frog into a Prince. It is speculation, and ### ignores the fact that even when Collins threw for 4,000 yards in 2002 he did not break the Top 10. It also ignores the fact that Collins was SURROUNDED by TALENT! Barber was RB #7 with nearly 2,000 all purpose yards and 11 TD's, Toomer was WR #6 with over 1,300 yards and 8 TD's, and Shockey was TE #3 with nearly 900 yards and 2 TD's!Culpepper will in all probability not return to 2004 statistics. This was the best ever performance by a QB with 432 points, and his 27.0 ppg is 2nd best ever behind Young's 1998 28.1 ppg. I believe that he will finish somewhere between 20.0 ppg and 21.0 ppg with a minimum of 320 points. Collins will come in between 18.0 ppg and 19 ppg and he will not eclipse 300 points.

 

[bostonfred]

BTW-the Tenn game that you point to Cpep as having a bad game, if you look at the game log you can see MN was manhandling them with Moore running all over them and protecting an early lead. And Cpep was 24/30. Not too bad considering.

So you're saying that, without Moss, the Vikings went to a ball control, run based offense, and Culpepper's fantasy stats suffered. In 2005, without Moss, the Vikings have stated that they want to move to a ball control, run based offense. Do you see why that's not good for Culpepper's fantasy numbers?

Absolutely great posting. I love it when somebody takes someone else's words or stats and uses it against them(see my link to the other thread where I provied numerous examples of this )

I really wanted to avoid making this post but I just can'y help it. After all you and bostonfred made the comments so here we go:Answer this question:

"How many teams throw the ball extensively in the 2nd half while nursing a 20 pt lead when the opponet cannot stop your running game?"

Answer:very few. Why? Because they play to win and protecting big leads in the 2nd half is common practice for "most" teams. 'Cmon guys. We're talking football 101 here.

I think we both understand what you're trying to say about that specific game. The Vikings had a lead so they ran more. The point is that you've just highlighted that Culpepper's stats suffer when the Vikings run more, and the Vikings have stated that they want to run more. Not just in blowouts, they want to be more of a running team in general. In previous years, they built their team around Randy Moss, even creating the "Randy ratio". This is a significant change in offensive philosophy.

Teams can run more when their passing game and D are good. Teams have to pass more when their D sucks. The Vikings have made significant improvements to their D.

 

[bagger.]

Looks like Collins will be the standard overhyped QB that all the sharks go after while solid top 10 QBs drop to the 5th and 6th round like Bulger or Brooks.

:rotflmao: You couldn't find a better QB to use as an example than Brooks.

On a completely unrelated note, I really like Cedric Wilson to crack 1k this year in Pittsburgh.

There is no crapping in the shark pool. Please take this back to the FFA.

You missed the point.Brooks has been a top 10 fantasy QB in every season he has played (except his rookie year).

Brooks typically goes in the 6th round at much better value than will Collins who will be drafted ahead of him.

I would say Brooks will outperform Collins fantasy-wise and get drafted lower.

Regarding Wilson, he put up 641 yards on an abysmal 49ers team. He will start opposite Ward who will draw the best CBs.

Just because someone has a different viewpoint does not make it fishing.

 

[bagger.]

It is unbelievable the hype that goes on in this forum.

Culpepper will easily outperform Collins.

Looks like Collins will be the standard overhyped QB that all the sharks go after while solid top 10 QBs drop to the 5th and 6th round like Bulger or Brooks.

This is a classic situaiton of everyone seeing Collins as a great pick if he was drafted the same place he was a year ago.  Unfortunately he won't be and by the looks of it will probably be drafted in the 3rd or 4th.

There will be a lot better choices in those rounds than Collins, especially if other QBs who will most likely perform better drop because of it.

In my personal opinion, hype = a lot of people thinking someone can do something, but it is totally unproven. Randy Moss has PROVEN imo that he can make any QB a great FF QB. That is not 'hype', that is proven reality.

It is not proven reality that Moss can do that in Oakland with Kerry Collins.:rotflmao: at "proven reality".

Back away from Moss.

 

[bagger.]

Some folks are forgetting that Moss will actually TAKE the place of an existing WR on the field.  Curry, Gabriel, and Whitted did a fine job of stretching the field; it is not like Collins had a bunch of 2nd graders out there with him.  These guys combined for many long TD plays [10 over 30 yards or more], over 1,600 yards receiving and 10 TD's.  Moss is not going to just add to these numbers!  On top of that in 1-1/2 games Gannon had 30% of these big play TD's.  Collins used 14 full games and he barely doubled that output.  On top of the fact that he FAILED to actually record any TD's in over 1/3 of the games!

This cannot be emphasized enough. Gabriel and Curry will suffer because of Moss' presence. One might get 500 yards, the other maybe 300.With Moss getting most likely 1,200 and Porter maybe cracking the 1k mark, that's about 1,100 yards to be allocated among the RBs, TEs, Gabriel, and Curry.

That's not a lot left.

People will overvalue Raiders' TEs again this year (as well as Curry and Gabriel).

Don't fall into that trap.

Jeez, can you all please take one second to look up some stats to actually support your opinions before throwing out these silly arguements. Not counting his injury plagued last year, Randy Moss has gone over 1200 yards in every single one of his years as a pro and he has only had one year under 1300. Yet he is "most likely" to just get 1200 now? In his rookie year he put up 1313!!! And now in the prime of his career, hes "most likely" to get just 1200. Great logic.

Settle down. In no way was I predicting that Moss "only" get 1,200 yards. Change my "most likely" to 1,400 yards. The point remains the same.You can't give Moss all of these yards without it coming from someone else.

There is not a never-ending supply of receiving yards that can be amassed by the Raiders.

You want to give all 3,500 yards to Moss next year? Fine with me. But the rest of the Raiders then get 0.

 

[bagger.]

This is going too far.  I don't care if Collins has Moss, Harrison and Owens - he's not putting up more fantasy points than Culpepper.  Culpepper was the #1 QB last year without Moss much of the season.  Consistency is the key and it doesn't help to have a guy like Collins put up 40 points one week and come back with 5 the next.  Collins had some good games last year but they were mostly against bad pass D's - Saints, Chargers, Broncos, Chiefs and Titans.  Culpepper is a lock for 20 points regardless of who the Vikes play.

Did you look at his games without Moss?In his first game without Moss, Culpepper threw for 183 yards and one TD while rushing for 4 yards. I know you said "regardless of who the Vikes play", but this was against Tennessee, a "Great Matchup". I didn't do the math, but it looks like he was just shy of the 20 point mark in that game. Still it was his first without Moss, so we'll give him a mulligan.

He bounced back the next week with 231 yards, 1 TD and 2 INTs against the Giants. Even with his 32 rushing yards, that was a little south of the 20 points you said he was a lock for.

But don't worry, he had a great matchup the following week against Indianapolis. Sure, he didn't have Moss, but he put up a whopping 169 yards and a TD. His 27 rushing yards brought him into the double digits range, though, so it wasn't a complete waste.

He blew up against Green Bay, but he barely broke the 20 point mark against Detroit the following week.

He then bounced back and averaged almost 300 yards and more than 2 TDs a game the rest of the way once Moss came back. It's a small sample size, but his rush yards even went back up, and he scored his only rush TDs of the season while Moss was playing.

I'm absolutely amazed that people assume Culpepper's just going to overcome the loss of a player of Moss' caliber and continue to be a 320+ point QB, when the only evidence we have of Culpepper without Moss points to him struggling against the worst pass defenses in the league.

Great posting. Wow, its amazing what the facts will do to somebody's argument.I find it hilarious that I've been accused of 2 people of fishing here, yet I continue to bring up fact after fact after fact, while others just spew info like "Culpepper did great without Moss" and "Moss will most likely only have 1200 yards receiving" and saying that Collins won't put up great numbers because he historically hasn't(as if Brad Johnson and Jeff George had always put up great numbers without Moss).

Ladies and gentlemen, I am bringing the facts. I'M BRINGING IT!!! Now, sit down and crap your lumpy crap all together and jump on it!

you're making even less sense than normal.

 

[Family Matters]

BTW-the Tenn game that you point to Cpep as having a bad game, if you look at the game log you can see MN was manhandling them with Moore running all over them and protecting an early lead. And Cpep was 24/30. Not too bad considering.

So you're saying that, without Moss, the Vikings went to a ball control, run based offense, and Culpepper's fantasy stats suffered. In 2005, without Moss, the Vikings have stated that they want to move to a ball control, run based offense. Do you see why that's not good for Culpepper's fantasy numbers?

Absolutely great posting. I love it when somebody takes someone else's words or stats and uses it against them(see my link to the other thread where I provied numerous examples of this )

I really wanted to avoid making this post but I just can'y help it. After all you and bostonfred made the comments so here we go:Answer this question:

"How many teams throw the ball extensively in the 2nd half while nursing a 20 pt lead when the opponet cannot stop your running game?"

Answer:very few. Why? Because they play to win and protecting big leads in the 2nd half is common practice for "most" teams. 'Cmon guys. We're talking football 101 here.

I think we both understand what you're trying to say about that specific game. The Vikings had a lead so they ran more. The point is that you've just highlighted that Culpepper's stats suffer when the Vikings run more, and the Vikings have stated that they want to run more. Not just in blowouts, they want to be more of a running team in general. In previous years, they built their team around Randy Moss, even creating the "Randy ratio". This is a significant change in offensive philosophy.

Teams can run more when their passing game and D are good. Teams have to pass more when their D sucks. The Vikings have made significant improvements to their D.

That is a valid point. If they do reduce ths passing atempts enough his numbers will no doubt reflect it. I guess I've heard this so many times from Tice that I'll beleive it when i see it. More likely, there will be a better balance, and there should be. I do not think they ran as effectively as they could have last year. In some ways this may actually help him but like I said, you do make a valid point. Will that kept him from ranking higher than Collins? I'm doubt it. Culpepper is still a much better QB than Collins is and that will not change.

 

[David Yudkin]

The Vikings have stated that they want to run more. Not just in blowouts, they want to be more of a running team in general. In previous years, they built their team around Randy Moss, even creating the "Randy ratio". This is a significant change in offensive philosophy.

No matter what a team says, one has to wonder if what they outwardly say and how it transaltes in terms of actual plays run on the field. So I ask the theoretical question, what does "run more" actually mean?Here are the Vikings passing and rushing attempts over the past 5 seasons . . .2000: 495 passing attempts, 428 rushing attempts2001: 555 passing attempts, 376 rushing attempts2002: 558 passing attempts, 473 rushing attempts2003: 520 passing attempts, 493 rushing attempts2004: 552 passing attempts, 387 rushing attemptsComparing 2004 vs 2003, the Vikings rushed 106 fewer times but only passed 32 more times. Minnesota could very well go back to the 475 carry range like they did in 2002. But in that year they also had 558 passing attepts (the highest of any of the past 5 seasons).I hardly think that the Vikings are going to scrap the passing game for a run-centric offense.As others have mentioned, the Vikings Achilles heel the past few years has been more on the defensive side of the ball. They do seem to have improved on defense, but how much is an unkown and how that will impact the defense is another question mark.

 

[bostonfred]

The Vikings have stated that they want to run more. Not just in blowouts, they want to be more of a running team in general. In previous years, they built their team around Randy Moss, even creating the "Randy ratio". This is a significant change in offensive philosophy.

No matter what a team says, one has to wonder if what they outwardly say and how it transaltes in terms of actual plays run on the field. So I ask the theoretical question, what does "run more" actually mean?Here are the Vikings passing and rushing attempts over the past 5 seasons . . .

2000: 495 passing attempts, 428 rushing attempts

2001: 555 passing attempts, 376 rushing attempts

2002: 558 passing attempts, 473 rushing attempts

2003: 520 passing attempts, 493 rushing attempts

2004: 552 passing attempts, 387 rushing attempts

Comparing 2004 vs 2003, the Vikings rushed 106 fewer times but only passed 32 more times. Minnesota could very well go back to the 475 carry range like they did in 2002. But in that year they also had 558 passing attepts (the highest of any of the past 5 seasons).

I hardly think that the Vikings are going to scrap the passing game for a run-centric offense.

As others have mentioned, the Vikings Achilles heel the past few years has been more on the defensive side of the ball. They do seem to have improved on defense, but how much is an unkown and how that will impact the defense is another question mark.

So you're saying that they were able to both run the both a lot AND pass the ball a lot when they had the most explosive player in the NFL. Now that they don't have the most explosive player in the NFL, the definition of "run more" may be running in more situations, and on a greater percentage of plays, but on a team that won't have as many offensive plays. I agree they're not "scrapping the passing game". I just don't think it will be as effective without Moss.

I am also concerned that an improving defense may allow them to be more conservative in more games than they were in previous years.

None of this is saying that he WON'T be good. It's saying that there's a ton of RISK. And that's the type of guy you should avoid in the first two rounds.

 

[Family Matters]

The Vikings have stated that they want to run more. Not just in blowouts, they want to be more of a running team in general. In previous years, they built their team around Randy Moss, even creating the "Randy ratio". This is a significant change in offensive philosophy.

No matter what a team says, one has to wonder if what they outwardly say and how it transaltes in terms of actual plays run on the field. So I ask the theoretical question, what does "run more" actually mean?Here are the Vikings passing and rushing attempts over the past 5 seasons . . .

2000: 495 passing attempts, 428 rushing attempts

2001: 555 passing attempts, 376 rushing attempts

2002: 558 passing attempts, 473 rushing attempts

2003: 520 passing attempts, 493 rushing attempts

2004: 552 passing attempts, 387 rushing attempts

Comparing 2004 vs 2003, the Vikings rushed 106 fewer times but only passed 32 more times. Minnesota could very well go back to the 475 carry range like they did in 2002. But in that year they also had 558 passing attepts (the highest of any of the past 5 seasons).

I hardly think that the Vikings are going to scrap the passing game for a run-centric offense.

As others have mentioned, the Vikings Achilles heel the past few years has been more on the defensive side of the ball. They do seem to have improved on defense, but how much is an unkown and how that will impact the defense is another question mark.

So you're saying that they were able to both run the both a lot AND pass the ball a lot when they had the most explosive player in the NFL. Now that they don't have the most explosive player in the NFL, the definition of "run more" may be running in more situations, and on a greater percentage of plays, but on a team that won't have as many offensive plays. I agree they're not "scrapping the passing game". I just don't think it will be as effective without Moss.

I am also concerned that an improving defense may allow them to be more conservative in more games than they were in previous years.

None of this is saying that he WON'T be good. It's saying that there's a ton of RISK. And that's the type of guy you should avoid in the first two rounds.

I think few are in disagreement about taking him too early. Some will of course but the majority will wait until 2nd or later. But this thread is simply asking who finishes ranked higher. Of all your posts you have never addressed the original question: "Who ends the season ranked higher?"

 

[bostonfred]

The Vikings have stated that they want to run more. Not just in blowouts, they want to be more of a running team in general. In previous years, they built their team around Randy Moss, even creating the "Randy ratio". This is a significant change in offensive philosophy.

No matter what a team says, one has to wonder if what they outwardly say and how it transaltes in terms of actual plays run on the field. So I ask the theoretical question, what does "run more" actually mean?Here are the Vikings passing and rushing attempts over the past 5 seasons . . .

2000: 495 passing attempts, 428 rushing attempts

2001: 555 passing attempts, 376 rushing attempts

2002: 558 passing attempts, 473 rushing attempts

2003: 520 passing attempts, 493 rushing attempts

2004: 552 passing attempts, 387 rushing attempts

Comparing 2004 vs 2003, the Vikings rushed 106 fewer times but only passed 32 more times. Minnesota could very well go back to the 475 carry range like they did in 2002. But in that year they also had 558 passing attepts (the highest of any of the past 5 seasons).

I hardly think that the Vikings are going to scrap the passing game for a run-centric offense.

As others have mentioned, the Vikings Achilles heel the past few years has been more on the defensive side of the ball. They do seem to have improved on defense, but how much is an unkown and how that will impact the defense is another question mark.

So you're saying that they were able to both run the both a lot AND pass the ball a lot when they had the most explosive player in the NFL. Now that they don't have the most explosive player in the NFL, the definition of "run more" may be running in more situations, and on a greater percentage of plays, but on a team that won't have as many offensive plays. I agree they're not "scrapping the passing game". I just don't think it will be as effective without Moss.

I am also concerned that an improving defense may allow them to be more conservative in more games than they were in previous years.

None of this is saying that he WON'T be good. It's saying that there's a ton of RISK. And that's the type of guy you should avoid in the first two rounds.

I think few are in disagreement about taking him too early. Some will of course but the majority will wait until 2nd or later. But this thread is simply asking who finishes ranked higher. Of all your posts you have never addressed the original question: "Who ends the season ranked higher?"

I don't do projections for players. I look at a range that they could fall into. I've seen so many preseason threads bumped over the years with people making outrageous claims on one side or the other that both turn out wrong. So instead, I try to figure out a range where you think a guy could do, and take the team that should, on average, do the best. (as an aside, I think the one thing I need to focus on more is the player's high and low VBD numbers, not actual results, because if a player busts, you should be able to replace them with a baseline player). Right now, I think Collins' upside is higher than Culpepper's downside, and I am bullish on Collins and bearish on Culpepper, so I guess you could say I think there's a chance Collins finishes higher, and I think that chance is pretty significant, but I'm trying to keep an open mind and give Culpepper the benefit of the doubt in terms of ranking him and consider the chance that he is still a top fantasy QB without Moss.

If you asked me which one's going to exceed his draft position by more, though, I'd take Collins, because he's going to be drafted significantly later than Culpepper.

 

[David Yudkin]

The Vikings have stated that they want to run more. Not just in blowouts, they want to be more of a running team in general. In previous years, they built their team around Randy Moss, even creating the "Randy ratio". This is a significant change in offensive philosophy.

No matter what a team says, one has to wonder if what they outwardly say and how it transaltes in terms of actual plays run on the field. So I ask the theoretical question, what does "run more" actually mean?Here are the Vikings passing and rushing attempts over the past 5 seasons . . .

2000: 495 passing attempts, 428 rushing attempts

2001: 555 passing attempts, 376 rushing attempts

2002: 558 passing attempts, 473 rushing attempts

2003: 520 passing attempts, 493 rushing attempts

2004: 552 passing attempts, 387 rushing attempts

Comparing 2004 vs 2003, the Vikings rushed 106 fewer times but only passed 32 more times. Minnesota could very well go back to the 475 carry range like they did in 2002. But in that year they also had 558 passing attepts (the highest of any of the past 5 seasons).

I hardly think that the Vikings are going to scrap the passing game for a run-centric offense.

As others have mentioned, the Vikings Achilles heel the past few years has been more on the defensive side of the ball. They do seem to have improved on defense, but how much is an unkown and how that will impact the defense is another question mark.

So you're saying that they were able to both run the both a lot AND pass the ball a lot when they had the most explosive player in the NFL. Now that they don't have the most explosive player in the NFL, the definition of "run more" may be running in more situations, and on a greater percentage of plays, but on a team that won't have as many offensive plays. I agree they're not "scrapping the passing game". I just don't think it will be as effective without Moss.

I am also concerned that an improving defense may allow them to be more conservative in more games than they were in previous years.

None of this is saying that he WON'T be good. It's saying that there's a ton of RISK. And that's the type of guy you should avoid in the first two rounds.

I think few are in disagreement about taking him too early. Some will of course but the majority will wait until 2nd or later. But this thread is simply asking who finishes ranked higher. Of all your posts you have never addressed the original question: "Who ends the season ranked higher?"

I don't do projections for players. I look at a range that they could fall into. I've seen so many preseason threads bumped over the years with people making outrageous claims on one side or the other that Right now, I think Collins' upside is higher than Culpepper's downside, and I am bullish on Collins and bearish on Culpepper, so I guess you could say I think there's a chance Collins finishes higher, and I think that chance is pretty significant, but I'm trying to keep an open mind and give Culpepper the benefit of the doubt in terms of ranking him and consider the chance that he is still a top fantasy QB without Moss.

If you asked me which one's going to exceed his draft position by more, though, I'd take Collins, because he's going to be drafted significantly later than Culpepper.

B.F. -CPep has averaged 80 fantasy points per year on the ground. Collins has averaged 2.

If this is a race to 320 fantasy points as some have set the baseline (and assuming the same rushing performance levels for both):

Culpepper would need 240 passing points while Collins would need 318 passing points. (Culpepper has averaged 274 passing points a year--including the year he was hurt.) That would equate to a 3400/20 TD/10 INT season to account for 240 passing points.

Collins would need 4200/32 TD/20 INT to account for 318 passing points.

IMO, Culpepper has more of a chance to EXCEED his required stat line than Collins does.

In terms of value, I'm not so sure that Collins will fall all that far in drafts. After Manning, Culpepper, and McNabb, I suspect Collins could be the next QB selected or at least 1 of the next 3 (so QB 4-6).

I can see a Moss owner taking Collins in the 3rd or 4th. It's not out of the realm of possibility that there might be only a round difference between Culpepper and Collins. As I've said in this and other threads . . . there's going to be SOMEBODY in almost every league that is going to take Collins WAY before the other owners would.

 

[Family Matters]

The Vikings have stated that they want to run more. Not just in blowouts, they want to be more of a running team in general. In previous years, they built their team around Randy Moss, even creating the "Randy ratio". This is a significant change in offensive philosophy.

No matter what a team says, one has to wonder if what they outwardly say and how it transaltes in terms of actual plays run on the field. So I ask the theoretical question, what does "run more" actually mean?Here are the Vikings passing and rushing attempts over the past 5 seasons . . .

2000: 495 passing attempts, 428 rushing attempts

2001: 555 passing attempts, 376 rushing attempts

2002: 558 passing attempts, 473 rushing attempts

2003: 520 passing attempts, 493 rushing attempts

2004: 552 passing attempts, 387 rushing attempts

Comparing 2004 vs 2003, the Vikings rushed 106 fewer times but only passed 32 more times. Minnesota could very well go back to the 475 carry range like they did in 2002. But in that year they also had 558 passing attepts (the highest of any of the past 5 seasons).

I hardly think that the Vikings are going to scrap the passing game for a run-centric offense.

As others have mentioned, the Vikings Achilles heel the past few years has been more on the defensive side of the ball. They do seem to have improved on defense, but how much is an unkown and how that will impact the defense is another question mark.

So you're saying that they were able to both run the both a lot AND pass the ball a lot when they had the most explosive player in the NFL. Now that they don't have the most explosive player in the NFL, the definition of "run more" may be running in more situations, and on a greater percentage of plays, but on a team that won't have as many offensive plays. I agree they're not "scrapping the passing game". I just don't think it will be as effective without Moss.

I am also concerned that an improving defense may allow them to be more conservative in more games than they were in previous years.

None of this is saying that he WON'T be good. It's saying that there's a ton of RISK. And that's the type of guy you should avoid in the first two rounds.

I think few are in disagreement about taking him too early. Some will of course but the majority will wait until 2nd or later. But this thread is simply asking who finishes ranked higher. Of all your posts you have never addressed the original question: "Who ends the season ranked higher?"

I don't do projections for players. I look at a range that they could fall into. I've seen so many preseason threads bumped over the years with people making outrageous claims on one side or the other that Right now, I think Collins' upside is higher than Culpepper's downside, and I am bullish on Collins and bearish on Culpepper, so I guess you could say I think there's a chance Collins finishes higher, and I think that chance is pretty significant, but I'm trying to keep an open mind and give Culpepper the benefit of the doubt in terms of ranking him and consider the chance that he is still a top fantasy QB without Moss.

If you asked me which one's going to exceed his draft position by more, though, I'd take Collins, because he's going to be drafted significantly later than Culpepper.

B.F. -CPep has averaged 80 fantasy points per year on the ground. Collins has averaged 2.

If this is a race to 320 fantasy points as some have set the baseline (and assuming the same rushing performance levels for both):

Culpepper would need 240 passing points while Collins would need 318 passing points. (Culpepper has averaged 274 passing points a year--including the year he was hurt.) That would equate to a 3400/20 TD/10 INT season to account for 240 passing points.

Collins would need 4200/32 TD/20 INT to account for 318 passing points.

IMO, Culpepper has more of a chance to EXCEED his required stat line than Collins does.

In terms of value, I'm not so sure that Collins will fall all that far in drafts. After Manning, Culpepper, and McNabb, I suspect Collins could be the next QB selected or at least 1 of the next 3 (so QB 4-6).

I can see a Moss owner taking Collins in the 3rd or 4th. It's not out of the realm of possibility that there might be only a round difference between Culpepper and Collins. As I've said in this and other threads . . . there's going to be SOMEBODY in almost every league that is going to take Collins WAY before the other owners would.

I agree David that Collins will not present great value in many drafts. Some dee the QB's go early the drafting trends will need to be taken into account for each of us. Also, the homer drafters will drive up his ADP. As for BF's point that he's made about taking QB's too early, I agree that your league's drafting trends allow you to wait until at least round 4, or QB6 or later, then Collins begins to present some value based on his upside. Grabbing someone like Collins based on upside is somewhat risky. He's likely to become the ultimate "high risk-high reward" QB of the draft. In that scenario he'll either lead you to the promise land or leave you sucking wind scrambling for a waiver wire solution.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Culpepper will end the season with better stats........easily. Where owners are going to be drafting Collins, there will be very little upside for him. Culpepper had an outstanding season last year and his stock is dropping in the offseason because of Moss not being in town.I don't buy it. He's still going to gets lots of passing yards, lots of rushing yards and TD's. I do think his INT rate will go up from last year, but I think he's definately top 3 QB material again this year.Collins..........he's a bust waiting to happen. There's way to much pressure on this guy right now. They have no legitimate running game and the Black Hole is going to swallow these guys up.I for one will be on the sidelines watching teams draft the Raiders players too high, trying to be a part of the NEW thing. I've been burned like this before but more times than not I've been happy for not jumping into the fire in situations like this.

 

[bostonfred]

We've done several polls saying Collins will be taken between QB5 and QB10. We've also discussed when you would take him, and many of us who like him this year said we'd take him in the late 4th or early 5th. That makes sense, because the RBs will be picked clean, and the top tier of QBs, WRs, the stud TEs are gone. I'm expecting a QB run from the 5th to 7th rounds, as people look at the dropoff in the ubiquitous mid tier of WRs (it seems like there's so many this year) and second tier backs between this pick and their next and decide they can wait, and I think Collins will and should be one of the first taken during that time.

 

[LHUCKS]

We've done several polls saying Collins will be taken between QB5 and QB10. We've also discussed when you would take him, and many of us who like him this year said we'd take him in the late 4th or early 5th. That makes sense, because the RBs will be picked clean, and the top tier of QBs, WRs, the stud TEs are gone.

I'm expecting a QB run from the 5th to 7th rounds, as people look at the dropoff in the ubiquitous mid tier of WRs (it seems like there's so many this year) and second tier backs between this pick and their next and decide they can wait, and I think Collins will and should be one of the first taken during that time.

Yep Fred, I took Collins at 6.12 in Z31.

 

[Family Matters]

We've done several polls saying Collins will be taken between QB5 and QB10.  We've also discussed when you would take him, and many of us who like him this year said we'd take him in the late 4th or early 5th.  That makes sense, because the RBs will be picked clean, and the top tier of QBs, WRs, the stud TEs are gone. 

I'm expecting a QB run from the 5th to 7th rounds, as people look at the dropoff in the ubiquitous mid tier of WRs (it seems like there's so many this year) and second tier backs between this pick and their next and decide they can wait, and I think Collins will and should be one of the first taken during that time.

Yep Fred, I took Collins at 6.12 in Z31.

Just curious. How many QB's were already taken?

 

[LHUCKS]

We've done several polls saying Collins will be taken between QB5 and QB10.  We've also discussed when you would take him, and many of us who like him this year said we'd take him in the late 4th or early 5th.  That makes sense, because the RBs will be picked clean, and the top tier of QBs, WRs, the stud TEs are gone. 

I'm expecting a QB run from the 5th to 7th rounds, as people look at the dropoff in the ubiquitous mid tier of WRs (it seems like there's so many this year) and second tier backs between this pick and their next and decide they can wait, and I think Collins will and should be one of the first taken during that time.

Yep Fred, I took Collins at 6.12 in Z31.

Just curious. How many QB's were already taken?

Collins was the 7th QB off the board.After: Manning, Culpepper, McNabb, Bulger, Vick, Palmer

 

[Family Matters]

We've done several polls saying Collins will be taken between QB5 and QB10.  We've also discussed when you would take him, and many of us who like him this year said we'd take him in the late 4th or early 5th.  That makes sense, because the RBs will be picked clean, and the top tier of QBs, WRs, the stud TEs are gone. 

I'm expecting a QB run from the 5th to 7th rounds, as people look at the dropoff in the ubiquitous mid tier of WRs (it seems like there's so many this year) and second tier backs between this pick and their next and decide they can wait, and I think Collins will and should be one of the first taken during that time.

Yep Fred, I took Collins at 6.12 in Z31.

Just curious. How many QB's were already taken?

Collins was the 7th QB off the board.After: Manning, Culpepper, McNabb, Bulger, Vick, Palmer

Thanks LHUCKS. Hmm, Palmer 6th. Very interesting.

 

[Phlash]

I'll say Kerry Collins. We've seen what Culpepper looks like without Moss.

Didn't he put up record breaking numbers despite Randy Moss being injured half of the year?