PDA

View Full Version : Bengals v. Vikings



WMR
09-18-2005, 02:49 PM
What a great start.

Seems like Bengals can't stand prosperity...

holding, call back TD run by Chris Perry

Interception in Red Zone by Carson Palmer

Offsides, David Pollack, negated Fumble Recovery inside Viking 20 by Bengals

STUPID PLAYS: GOT TO CUT THEM OUT

WMR
09-18-2005, 02:50 PM
When you've got a chance to put your foot on their neck and crush them, you gotta do it.

Hoosier Red
09-18-2005, 03:34 PM
On the flip side, I'll take 27-0 at halftime

Steve4192
09-18-2005, 03:35 PM
Point taken, but 27 to zip at the half ain't too shabby. Sure, 38-0 would be nice, but as a long suffering Bengal fan I'm not going to complain about the Bengals not winning by enough.

Edit: What Hoosier said.

WMR
09-18-2005, 03:36 PM
No, they kept piling on. Its just that they could have done it a lot sooner.

I'm not complaining at the final halftime result.

HOWEVER: If the Vikings weren't so inept, the Bengals could have really hurt themselves with some of those dumb errors.

WMR
09-18-2005, 03:37 PM
Did you see that drive where they had a false start EVERY SINGLE SERIES??

You can't have those sort of brain freezes and expect to beat quality opponents.

I'm confident Marvin will get it squared away.

Hoosier Red
09-18-2005, 03:52 PM
The penalties are perplexing to say the least. Perhaps louder than they expected at home?
Still they have to cut that out, but I'm not sure if its all negatives on Minnesota. You have to credit the defense as well.

WMR
09-18-2005, 03:55 PM
The penalties are perplexing to say the least. Perhaps louder than they expected at home?
Still they have to cut that out, but I'm not sure if its all negatives on Minnesota. You have to credit the defense as well.

Bengals Defense has been very solid today.


WAYYY too many penalties. 11 to this point; 12:15 left in 3rd Quarter

WMR
09-18-2005, 03:56 PM
LOL: Pollack offsides again. Bengals cause a fumble and recover; Pollack negates it with offsides.

Second time today!!! STAY ONSIDES POLLACK; SHOW A LITTLE INTELLIGENCE

WMR
09-18-2005, 03:58 PM
LOL, yeah, Vikings don't miss Randy Moss. Sure.

WMR
09-18-2005, 03:59 PM
Daunte Culpepper looks like a deer caught in the headlights out there.

Chip R
09-18-2005, 04:35 PM
LOL, yeah, Vikings don't miss Randy Moss. Sure.

Moss would have tanked it by halftime.

KronoRed
09-18-2005, 06:09 PM
If I'm Culpepper I'm begging to be traded to a team with some talent.

Caveat Emperor
09-18-2005, 06:16 PM
If I'm Culpepper I'm begging to be traded to a team with some talent.

He's not exactly helping his own cause on the team...

Sea Ray
09-18-2005, 07:57 PM
Did you see that drive where they had a false start EVERY SINGLE SERIES??

You can't have those sort of brain freezes and expect to beat quality opponents.

I'm confident Marvin will get it squared away.

I agree and that's evidence that they're not there yet but isn't nice that they're now so talented that they don't have to play a perfect game to win?

Remember the saying "We're not good enough to win if we're making mistakes because our margin for error is so small"?

Well they're past that point now

WMR
09-18-2005, 08:37 PM
I agree and that's evidence that they're not there yet but isn't nice that they're now so talented that they don't have to play a perfect game to win?

Remember the saying "We're not good enough to win if we're making mistakes because our margin for error is so small"?

Well they're past that point now

Yep. Important thing is to get that stuff squared away ASAP.

Bengals ended the day having committed 17 penalties, a new franchise record.

How amazing, with so many inept performances in Bengal history, such a resounding victory is the one where they set their all-time penalty record!

The good thing about that is that it will ensure that these guys won't get complacent b/f Chicago next week. Marvin has got PLENTY to work on with these guys, and you can bet he'll be harping at them all to clean it up.

But yeah, to be able to basically shrug off such a huge amount of penalties and kick the Vikings butt so soundly is a credit to what Marvin has done with this team.

WMR
09-18-2005, 08:51 PM
Moss would have tanked it by halftime.

If they were done like they were then you very well may be right.

HOWEVER: If Randy Moss was still with the Vikings, I think you're looking at a close ballgame.

When Randy Moss is on the field, you are playing with some serious fire if you try and pull up a safety for some extra run protection. You fail to double-team Randy Moss on every possession at your own peril.

Which opens up the running game... Which forces them to overload for the run... Which opens up the passing game... LOL, you get the idea.

Which makes things much simpler and easier for Daunte Culpepper. It's like he's had his security blankey rudely snatched away and he simply does not know how to react or play the game w/o Randy Moss.

Sabo Fan
09-18-2005, 09:48 PM
LOL, yeah, Vikings don't miss Randy Moss. Sure.

It doesn't matter if you have Randy Moss if you don't have any time to throw the football. The offensive line is a mess and Culpepper is under fire almost every play. He's put all the pressure on himself and trying to force things. The biggest loss this offseason was not Moss, but offensive coordinator Scott Linehan. He was Culpepper's guru and one of the top O.C.'s in the NFL. Too bad that the ownership changeover occured when it did and Linehan was able to be snatched up.

The Bengals played a good game and the Vikings tanked. I'm a Viking fan so I speak from experience here: don't get too high on your team just yet. They're good, but fast starts can just as quickly turn into slides. Things are never as bad as they seem, and usually never as good.


If I'm Culpepper I'm begging to be traded to a team with some talent.

The sad part is that this is probably as talented a team as Culpepper has been on. Look up and down that roster and you see lots of talented, Pro-Bowl caliber players. For whatever reason they seem to be playing tight, like they're trying not to lose instead of trying to win.

Chip R
09-18-2005, 09:51 PM
If they were done like they were then you very well may be right.

HOWEVER: If Randy Moss was still with the Vikings, I think you're looking at a close ballgame.

When Randy Moss is on the field, you are playing with some serious fire if you try and pull up a safety for some extra run protection. You fail to double-team Randy Moss on every possession at your own peril.

Which opens up the running game... Which forces them to overload for the run... Which opens up the passing game... LOL, you get the idea.

Which makes things much simpler and easier for Daunte Culpepper. It's like he's had his security blankey rudely snatched away and he simply does not know how to react or play the game w/o Randy Moss.

Perhaps. But I remember a playoff game a few years ago when the Giants jumped out to a huge lead and Moss went into the tank for the rest of the game. And that could happen again whether Moss is playing or not. With turnovers amd such any team can fall behind very quickly. I don't deny Moss is a weapon and changes the way defenses scheme his team. All I'm saying is that Moss has a tendency to stop playing when his team is hopelessly behind. People will remember that and for that reason will always bring that up when comparing him to guys like Jerry Rice.

WMR
09-18-2005, 10:43 PM
It doesn't matter if you have Randy Moss if you don't have any time to throw the football.

Yeah, but how much more difficult is it to send a blitz when you can't pull a safety or a corner? You can't. Not effectively or consistently.

The Vikings miss Randy Moss.

If they still had Moss, losing the Offensive Coordinator would not be that big of a deal.

Without Moss, losing him is disastrous.

There is not a single player in the NFL who changes the way a team gameplan's for his team than Randy Moss. To proclaim that Moss isn't an integral part of the equation as to why the Vikings are struggling mightily is pure hogwash.

WMR
09-18-2005, 10:46 PM
If you trade the best player in the NFL for a mediocore linebacker, you can expect to experience some serious consequences.

Everybody benefitted from having Randy. The RBs, the linemen, definitely the QB, and certainly the other receivers. Without him there, you can downgrade each of their levels of effectiveness by at least a letter grade. Tack on losing your Center, and another starting lineman, and you are in for some serious trouble.

WMR
09-18-2005, 10:51 PM
Perhaps. But I remember a playoff game a few years ago when the Giants jumped out to a huge lead and Moss went into the tank for the rest of the game. And that could happen again whether Moss is playing or not. With turnovers amd such any team can fall behind very quickly. I don't deny Moss is a weapon and changes the way defenses scheme his team. All I'm saying is that Moss has a tendency to stop playing when his team is hopelessly behind. People will remember that and for that reason will always bring that up when comparing him to guys like Jerry Rice.

Yep. Too bad you couldn't combine the physical attributes of Randy Moss with the work ethic and attitude of Jerry Rice. What a monster that would be.

Sabo Fan
09-18-2005, 11:19 PM
Yeah, but how much more difficult is it to send a blitz when you can't pull a safety or a corner? You can't. Not effectively or consistently.

The Vikings miss Randy Moss.

If they still had Moss, losing the Offensive Coordinator would not be that big of a deal.

Without Moss, losing him is disastrous.

There is not a single player in the NFL who changes the way a team gameplan's for his team than Randy Moss. To proclaim that Moss isn't an integral part of the equation as to why the Vikings are struggling mightily is pure hogwash.

If you watched the game today, you would see that it didn't matter how many guys the Bengals sent, they were still getting pressure on Culpepper. Same thing with the Bucs last week. Tampa Bay brought four or five guys most of the time and were in Daunte's face all day. Similar thing today. It only took four or five guys to create pressure. Moss's departure is a big factor, no doubt. However, the bigger factor is the loss of Matt Birk and starting a rookie guard.

Go back to last year and look at the five games Moss either missed or was not a factor in. You project those numbers from those games over a sixteen game season for Culpepper and you get 30-some TD's and 10 interceptions. Not too shabby. The difference between not having Moss then and not having him now is the offensive line and the offensive coordinator, plain and simple.

Betterread
09-19-2005, 12:20 AM
Congratulations, Bengals. You really came out strong. Your franchise is really on the upswing.
Sabo Fan, your observations are quite accurate. I'm a Vikes fan and the O-line is not playing well. Birk's out for the year, their LT McKinnie is out for a game or two, and RG Dixon is retired. Moreover, the offensive coordinator (Steve Loney) doubles as the OLine coach. Guess what - it's obviously too much for him.
It is very clear that Daunte misses his QB/Ocoordinator Linehan. He lobbied hard for the Vikes to Linehan to stay. Harder than he did for the Vikes not to trade Randy.

WMR
09-19-2005, 12:32 AM
Like Daunte would admit how badly he needed Randy... Actually, I doubt he admitted in part because in his own mind he thought that he could indeed be just as successful without Randy. I don't care if Rich Brooks is calling the plays, you put a quarterback with a strong arm on the field with Randy Moss and Randy Moss is going to make that quarterback look good. As long as he can throw it far. LOL, I watched the game. I relished every second of it. Daunte made a plethora of mistakes today when he WASN'T under pressure. Just out and out bad throws.

You can talk about the O-Line, make excuses about the Offensive Coordinator, but don't try and make those excuses and then come with the garbage that Randy isn't just as big a factor--BIGGER--than those other 2. Just because you don't like Randy Moss don't try to minimize what his presence and productivity meant to the Vikings in season's past and what his absence means now.

Daunte Culpepper was suffering from the same delusions... "Randy doesn't matter" "I can still be just as good a QB w/o Randy" blah blah blah

Maybe he's beginning to come back to reality.

WMR
09-19-2005, 12:39 AM
At least Daunte knew where his bread was buttered, watching Kerry Collins play quarterback is painful. He hasn't gone to Moss nearly enough this game. Daunte knew who to throw to, somebody needs to send Collins/Norv Turner the memo.

Betterread
09-19-2005, 01:00 AM
Like Daunte would admit how badly he needed Randy... Actually, I doubt he admitted in part because in his own mind he thought that he could indeed be just as successful without Randy. I don't care if Rich Brooks is calling the plays, you put a quarterback with a strong arm on the field with Randy Moss and Randy Moss is going to make that quarterback look good. As long as he can throw it far. LOL, I watched the game. I relished every second of it. Daunte made a plethora of mistakes today when he WASN'T under pressure. Just out and out bad throws.

You can talk about the O-Line, make excuses about the Offensive Coordinator, but don't try and make those excuses and then come with the garbage that Randy isn't just as big a factor--BIGGER--than those other 2. Just because you don't like Randy Moss don't try to minimize what his presence and productivity meant to the Vikings in season's past and what his absence means now.

Daunte Culpepper was suffering from the same delusions... "Randy doesn't matter" "I can still be just as good a QB w/o Randy" blah blah blah

Maybe he's beginning to come back to reality.

First of all, I'm not a Randy Moss-hater. He was my favorite player and it will probably be a long time before the Vikings can find a receiver close to his ability. Out of that respect for what he contributed to the Vikes, I don't consider him "replaceable" by any receiver in the NFL.
Second of all, I'm not making any excuses. Daunte's talent is undeniable (except of course, to critics like you) but he is obviously not playing up to that talent. Do you doubt that the Bengals would trade Carson Palmer for Daunte in a minute if it was offered?
Therefore, I really don't appreciate your agressively rude and analytically wayword tone.
If you're a Bengals fan, then you should be enjoying your team's decisive win. If you're a Randy Moss fan and you want to see the Vikes do poorly, you should be enjoying yourself also.

WMR
09-19-2005, 01:10 AM
First of all, I'm not a Randy Moss-hater. He was my favorite player and it will probably be a long time before the Vikings can find a receiver close to his ability. Out of that respect for what he contributed to the Vikes, I don't consider him "replaceable" by any receiver in the NFL.
Second of all, I'm not making any excuses. Daunte's talent is undeniable (except of course, to critics like you) but he is obviously not playing up to that talent. Do you doubt that the Bengals would trade Carson Palmer for Daunte in a minute if it was offered?
Therefore, I really don't appreciate your agressively rude and analytically wayword tone.
If you're a Bengals fan, then you should be enjoying your team's decisive win. If you're a Randy Moss fan and you want to see the Vikes do poorly, you should be enjoying yourself also.

Would the Bengals trade Carson Palmer for Daunte Culpepper? They wouldn't trade Carson for Daunte, EVER. Carson is a more accurate passer, and is further along development-wise 3 years in than Daunte is at this point in his career. Not sure how many years he's been in the league.

And my comment was not directed towards you. It was directed towards the poster who said "if i watched the game" I would have seen so and so. If that's not "analytically wayward," please tell me what is.

Sea Ray
09-19-2005, 01:43 AM
It doesn't matter if you have Randy Moss if you don't have any time to throw the football. The offensive line is a mess and Culpepper is under fire almost every play. He's put all the pressure on himself and trying to force things. The biggest loss this offseason was not Moss, but offensive coordinator Scott Linehan. He was Culpepper's guru and one of the top O.C.'s in the NFL. Too bad that the ownership changeover occured when it did and Linehan was able to be snatched up.

Where did Linehan end up?


The Bengals played a good game and the Vikings tanked. I'm a Viking fan so I speak from experience here: don't get too high on your team just yet. They're good, but fast starts can just as quickly turn into slides. Things are never as bad as they seem, and usually never as good.

Don't worry. We're Bengal fans. We're trying to finish over .500. We know it's a long season and anything can happen. We also know that as well as we've started Pittsburgh has started off better. We're taking this one game at a time. All we know is it's a lot more fun to start off 2-0 than 1-4 which has been the norm. We also wish we had to compete against the likes of Detroit and Green Bay like your Vikes in order to win a division title

MWM
09-19-2005, 02:06 AM
Carson Palmer might already be better all around than Dante, but if he isn't he will be. No way would I trade Carson palmer for Dante Culpepper. He's too inconsistent, and yes, I think Moss bailed him out plenty of times the last few years.

Sabo Fan
09-19-2005, 02:10 AM
Would the Bengals trade Carson Palmer for Daunte Culpepper? They wouldn't trade Carson for Daunte, EVER. Carson is a more accurate passer, and is further along development-wise 3 years in than Daunte is at this point in his career. Not sure how many years he's been in the league.

And my comment was not directed towards you. It was directed towards the poster who said "if i watched the game" I would have seen so and so. If that's not "analytically wayward," please tell me what is.

Further along in his development? Culpepper was in the NFC Championship game in his second season. Where was Palmer in his second year? Oh, that's right, at home, so let's toss that argument out with the rest of the garbage. More accurate passer? Culpepper's 2004 completion percentage was just a tad under 70%. What was Palmer's?

Sorry you took so much offense at my comment about "if you had watched the game." While you obviously did, you must have been too busy celebrating your team's lead to have noticed a few things. The Bengals were constantly getting pressure with four and five man fronts, no extra blitzers needed. They did bring extra from time to time, but ultimately they were just as successful with just the four down-linemen.

Secondly, look at the success the Vikings had on the ground early. They had several decent runs and then were forced to abandon it when they got down early. Once that happens the defense can sit back and wait for the ball to be thrown downfield, and that's just what they did. Culpepper forced a lot of throws today because they were trailing and he had to do something drastic to get them back in it, hence the five picks. Throw in a porous offensive line and you've got a situation that no QB can succeed in.

You seem to be continually missing the point I'm trying to make: while trading Randy Moss has had a negative effect on this team, the loss of the offensive coordinator and two lineman has been bigger. Look around the league and you see several teams that don't have a top-5 wideout and who are still successful on offense. Offensive success starts and stops with the offensive line. You don't have that you don't have anything.

Sabo Fan
09-19-2005, 02:11 AM
Where did Linehan end up?

He's now the offensive coordinator with the Dolphins.

WVRed
09-19-2005, 09:45 AM
Count me in with those who think the Vikings dont miss Randy Moss, and im a Bengals fan.

If the Vikings still had Moss with the current offensive line, Culpepper still would have been rushed, unless he can play RG or C, I dont see how he helps. To quote a former CincyTalk troll, "Randy Moss is not your savior.":)

I've also never been a fan of the Vikings running backs(or any team that uses multiple backs). Seems like when you run out three or four backs you are trying to compensate for not having a single running back that doesnt do everything. But with that said, I do think they miss Onterrio Smith.

WMR
09-19-2005, 11:56 AM
Further along in his development? Culpepper was in the NFC Championship game in his second season. Where was Palmer in his second year? Oh, that's right, at home, so let's toss that argument out with the rest of the garbage. More accurate passer? Culpepper's 2004 completion percentage was just a tad under 70%. What was Palmer's?

Sorry you took so much offense at my comment about "if you had watched the game." While you obviously did, you must have been too busy celebrating your team's lead to have noticed a few things. The Bengals were constantly getting pressure with four and five man fronts, no extra blitzers needed. They did bring extra from time to time, but ultimately they were just as successful with just the four down-linemen.

Secondly, look at the success the Vikings had on the ground early. They had several decent runs and then were forced to abandon it when they got down early. Once that happens the defense can sit back and wait for the ball to be thrown downfield, and that's just what they did. Culpepper forced a lot of throws today because they were trailing and he had to do something drastic to get them back in it, hence the five picks. Throw in a porous offensive line and you've got a situation that no QB can succeed in.

You seem to be continually missing the point I'm trying to make: while trading Randy Moss has had a negative effect on this team, the loss of the offensive coordinator and two lineman has been bigger. Look around the league and you see several teams that don't have a top-5 wideout and who are still successful on offense. Offensive success starts and stops with the offensive line. You don't have that you don't have anything.

Do you know which quarterback in the NFL sustained the TOP QB Rating from November of last season through this weekend?

http://sportsmed.starwave.com/i/magazine/new/carson_palmer_heisman.jpg

Carson Palmer, that's who. Carson Palmer is in his second year and is putting up numbers easily comparable to Daunte Culpepper who is now playing in his SEVENTH. Daunte's career is likely at least already halfway finished. Carson's is just beginning. The Bengals are on the way up. The Vikings?? I'm not going to pronounce them dead yet; LOL, look at their division, you've gotta try REALLY hard not to be in the mix of things.

Lots can change from week to week, there's no doubt about that.

However: You're not going to find many people willing to trade Carson Palmer for Daunte Culpepper.

The only QBs I would trade Carson Palmer for are Peyton Manning and Mike Vick. I'm not even sure that Vick would be a better QB for the Bengals... actually, it is doubtful. I still couldn't pass up that excitement.

Daunte Culpepper? Pass.

Hmmm... oh, yeah, Culpepper "LED" the Vikings to the NFC Championship game against the NY Giants. LOL, let's hope that that doesn't remain as the highlight of his career.


Passing
Daunte Culpepper 13-28 for 78 yards, 3 INT, 0 TD.

Avg. Yards per pass 1.9

Fumbles Lost
Daunte Culpepper, Moe Williams



http://www.jsonline.com/packer/image/2001/102101/daunte1021.jpg
Final Score: NY Giants 41 - Minnesota Vikings 0

The thing is, I'm willing to give the guy a mulligan on that one. He was, after all, only in his second year. Please, however, don't try and make that out to be some sort of glowing endorsement of his QB prowess. After all, he put up a big goose egg with 3 INTs w/ Randy Moss and Cris Carter out there running routes for him. If he had continued to improve after that season, your argument that he's Carson's superior might hold more weight. I have not, however, seen any performances from Daunte Culpepper that suggest he is anything more than a QB with average accuracy and an above-average arm with the ability to throw Randy Moss a bomb.

Will Carson continue to progress? All signs point to yes; Irregardless: Compare his current abilities with those of Culpepper along with HIS current ceiling and DAUNTE'S ceiling for improvement. It is obvious which QB stands the best chance to improve his game, and, therefore, be more valuable to an NFL team.

I heard a really interesting quote on Daunte's performances against the Bucs and Bengals... I can't remember the guys name, but he usually comes up with some pretty good stuff.
"During Daunte's tenure with the Vikes, there would be 2-3 times per game when he would just run around in the backfield and launch the ball downfield where it would be caught by Randy Moss.
The funny thing is, he's still trying to play that way."

We disagree. Calling a hail mary to Randy Moss does not constitute brilliant play calling. Losing the O-Linemen hurts, no doubt about it, but that's not the biggest reason the Vikings have been struggling.

Maybe Daunte will improve, and I hope that he does, but as things stand right now, he appears to have been exposed as a guy who garnered lots of success riding the coattails of Randy Moss.

WMR
09-19-2005, 12:02 PM
Sorry you took so much offense at my comment about "if you had watched the game."

LOL, don't worry, you're not going to hurt my feelings. I say come as strong as you want; I just didn't want Betterread to get his feelings hurt at my expense.

Sea Ray
09-19-2005, 03:25 PM
The only QBs I would trade Carson Palmer for are Peyton Manning and Mike Vick. I'm not even sure that Vick would be a better QB for the Bengals... actually, it is doubtful. I still couldn't pass up that excitement.

Michael Vick is too much of an injury risk. He got hurt again yesterday. That's not the kind of QB you want in the NFL.

I would add Ben Roethlisberger to the Peyton Manning list though. It'd be hard to argue that Palmer is better than Big Ben.

traderumor
09-19-2005, 03:48 PM
It'd be hard to argue that Palmer is better than Big Ben.Not really :laugh: Not to take anything away from Roethelsberger, but he just doesn't have the tools that Palmer does. I think this is similar to the old Boomer vs. Bernie arguments, and I think for raw QB ability, just like Boomer had the advantage hands down on Bernie, so does Palmer over Roethelsberger. Of course, QB debates ought to begin and end with what we witnessed yesterday, whereby I don't care if you are Dante Culpepper, a bad line will make even the best NFL QBs look like rank amateurs.

On that note, I was reading on Bengals.com where the Bungles took Akili ahead of Culpepper n the same draft. Yet, watching Dante's play yesterday, he likely would have been just as big a bust if he was forced to develop in a run-for-your life environment like the Bengals would have provided for him during that time.

WMR
09-19-2005, 04:32 PM
Not really :laugh: Not to take anything away from Roethelsberger, but he just doesn't have the tools that Palmer does. I think this is similar to the old Boomer vs. Bernie arguments, and I think for raw QB ability, just like Boomer had the advantage hands down on Bernie, so does Palmer over Roethelsberger. Of course, QB debates ought to begin and end with what we witnessed yesterday, whereby I don't care if you are Dante Culpepper, a bad line will make even the best NFL QBs look like rank amateurs.

On that note, I was reading on Bengals.com where the Bungles took Akili ahead of Culpepper n the same draft. Yet, watching Dante's play yesterday, he likely would have been just as big a bust if he was forced to develop in a run-for-your life environment like the Bengals would have provided for him during that time.

I've always contended that if Akili had been coddled rather than thrown into the fray, he very well could have developed into a productive NFL quarterback.

Taking into consideration his abbreviated career at Oregon with a protracted holdout that caused him to miss the majority of his rookie training camp, compounded with his acknowledged difficulty in grasping the system (due as much to the previous 2 probably as anything else) and you've got yourself a recipe for disaster.

For me, the indelible memory of Akili Smith will be the game he was thrust into action against the Bucs (back when their Defense was probably the best in the NFL) and he got PANCAKED by Warren Sapp. I think that tumultous first season--when he obviously was not prepared to play QB in the NFL--scarred him permanently.

http://bengals.enquirer.com/2002/09/30/photos/sapprush_zoom.jpg

Look at that picture; all the plays on his arm... poor guy, never stood a chance.

Not only does Palmer have superior tools; he's more polished as well. There's a reason that Pittsburgh only allows Roethlisberger to throw 10 passes a game, despite the fact that their two best RBs are gone... They are a smash-mouth football team, no doubt, which makes Roethlisberger a perfect match for them. He can do simple things VERY well. He isn't asked to make many difficult plays.

How would Roethlisberger fare in a QB-Centered/Pass-happy offense? When Pitt. was finally forced to try and make some tough pass plays this past off-season, they struggled.

No way is he a better/more-skilled QB than Palmer. No way could he run the Bengals offense more effectively than Palmer.

As to Vick: Injury concerns or not, I take that guy in a heartbeat. He's the most exciting player in football, and, despite his shortcomings, I would take him on my squad any day of the week.

MWM
09-19-2005, 04:52 PM
Palmer vs. Big Ben is a tough one. I love Palmer, but I think Ben's going to have the better career. If I had to pick one, I'd pick Big Ben.

traderumor
09-19-2005, 05:04 PM
Palmer vs. Big Ben is a tough one. I love Palmer, but I think Ben's going to have the better career. If I had to pick one, I'd pick Big Ben.Career wise, I was thinking the opposite. I honestly think he's a flash that came into the right situation at just the right time. I don't see the capability to carry a team on his shoulders. Ben seems very workmanlike but will always need a very strong supporting cast, and as WilyMoRocks pointed out, a power oriented, run first offensive scheme to be successful in the NFL. He is not a franchise QB in the sense that the offense will revolve around his play.

OTH, Palmer is a toolsy QB that can carry a team on his back rather than just be another supporting cast member. I think an appropriate analogy might be Palmer is an executive in training whereas Roethelsberger is a middle manager who came in at that level but will never be promoted past that level, or if he is, to his own peril.

MWM
09-19-2005, 05:14 PM
From what I've seen of Ben Roethlisberger, my perception is quite different than yours. I think Ben is absolutely a franchise QB that can be built around. Sure he found a nice situation, but from watching him, he's got it all. He has all the talent in the world and could carry a team on his back if necessary. Playing QB is all about making good decisions quickly and throwing the ball in the right place. Ben has uncanny instincts for someone so young, IMO. He's accurate, got the size, arm strength, he's not too slow. I think he's going to be the best QB in the game within a couple of years and will be a for quite some time. IMO, he's one of the most talented young QBs to come along in a while. But I watched him quite a bit in college so I might have some bias. Even then I thought he was going to be a stud in the NFL. If I would have had the #1 pick in the draft last year, I would have taken him over either Rivers or Manning. I told that to plenty of people and now I'm the one laughing. The guy is a GREAT QB and I think he'd be a great QB in any situation.

Oh yeah, and I HATE the Steelers. Hate!

Reds/Flyers Fan
09-19-2005, 05:17 PM
If it's Palmer vs. Roethlisberger, I'd take Carson. Big Ben strikes me as very opportunistic and lucky. Now before anyone attacks, let me say that it seems to work very well for him. Take last years Bengals/Squealers game at PBS. Big Ben was sacked 7 times and harrassed all day, but he did just enough to help his team win. Put him on the Browns and I think he is mediocre, at best.

On another note - I was at the Bengals/Vikings game yesterday and I have to commend Minnesota fans. They aren't obnoxious and crude like Squealers and Browns fans. They aren't snobbish like Cowboys and Dolphins fans. They love their football and were thoroughly happy to be in Cincinnati yesterday having a good time with Bengals fans. A couple high-fived me AFTER the game yesterday, genuinly happy for the Bengals. None of that "You still suck" and "Make the playoffs first then celebrate" junk we see from Pittsburgh fans.

traderumor
09-19-2005, 05:22 PM
From what I've seen of Ben Roethlisberger, my perception is quite different than yours. I think Ben is absolutely a franchise QB that can be built around. Sure he found a nice situation, but from watching him, he's got it all. He has all the talent in the world and could carry a team on his back if necessary. Playing QB is all about making good decisions quickly and throwing the ball in the right place. Ben has uncanny instincts for someone so young, IMO. He's accurate, got the size, arm strength, he's not too slow. I think he's going to be the best QB in the game within a couple of years and will be a for quite some time. IMO, he's one of the most talented young QBs to come along in a while. But I watched him quite a bit in college so I might have some bias. Even then I thought he was going to be a stud in the NFL. If I would have had the #1 pick in the draft last year, I would have taken him over either Rivers or Manning. I told that to plenty of people and now I'm the one laughing. The guy is a GREAT QB and I think he'd be a great QB in any situation.

Oh yeah, and I HATE the Steelers. Hate!I'm biased as well, both hating the Steelers and being a Bengals fan. I am very happy that we have the QB we do and would probably only trade him for Peyton Manning. Regardless, I think both are in the top 10 QBs in the league at this point in their career and will probably both eventually be in the top 5 when they peak.

Fil3232
09-19-2005, 05:41 PM
Big Ben vs. Carson Palmer:

6 of one, half a dozen of the other.

Just on a side, but curious as to other's thoughts:

For my money Mike Vick is a bottom-tier QB. I think the Falcons would be much, much better off playing a pocket-passer (Matt Schaub hasnt been bad) and utilizing Vick's amazing running attributes as a WR/RB. (Think Matt Jones of JAX, but only superior).

pedro
09-19-2005, 05:44 PM
Just on a side, but curious as to other's thoughts:

For my money Mike Vick is a bottom-tier QB. I think the Falcons would be much, much better off playing a pocket-passer (Matt Schaub hasnt been bad) and utilizing Vick's amazing running attributes as a WR/RB. (Think Matt Jones of JAX, but only superior).

I don't know. I think Vick is pretty good and will just get better. He's certainly not the traditional QB, but his W/L record is exceptional. They'd be lucky to win 8 games with Shaub.

MWM
09-19-2005, 05:46 PM
No way, IMO. Vick brings so much more to an offense with his entire game. It chages the way a defense has to operate. The problem I have with Vick is that the second he loses a step or has a tender hammy, or any injury that slows him at all, he's pretty much worthless. But as long as he's as explosive as he is now, I think he's a fantatic weapon at QB.

Sea Ray
09-19-2005, 06:01 PM
I've always contended that if Akili had been coddled rather than thrown into the fray, he very well could have developed into a productive NFL quarterback.

Taking into consideration his abbreviated career at Oregon with a protracted holdout that caused him to miss the majority of his rookie training camp, compounded with his acknowledged difficulty in grasping the system (due as much to the previous 2 probably as anything else) and you've got yourself a recipe for disaster.


As to Vick: Injury concerns or not, I take that guy in a heartbeat. He's the most exciting player in football, and, despite his shortcomings, I would take him on my squad any day of the week.

Akili and Vick are similar QBs. In order for Akili to excell the offense would have to revolve around his scrambling ability. The Bengals were not prepared to do that. Other NFL teams have also failed to make him into a pocket passer. This was most recently tried by TB by sending him to NFL Europe. After seeing that season they cut him.

As for Michael Vick, what are you going to do when he gets hurt? Sometimes it'll be serious like that broken bone a couple years ago and sometimes it's a hamstring like yesterday. Even the hamstring injuries are more serious for him than for a pocket passer.

I have come around to the traditional thinking of NFL GMs and that is the risk of injury is too great in the NFL to have your QB scrambling around for 100 yards a game.

I'd much prefer a few key scrambles like Elway would do.

Sea Ray
09-19-2005, 06:18 PM
No way, IMO. Vick brings so much more to an offense with his entire game. It chages the way a defense has to operate. The problem I have with Vick is that the second he loses a step or has a tender hammy, or any injury that slows him at all, he's pretty much worthless. But as long as he's as explosive as he is now, I think he's a fantatic weapon at QB.

This reminds me of the Joe Carter/Eric Davis arguments I had with Cleveland fans 20 years ago.

Now that both of then are retired we can evaluate their careers. I must now admit that Joe Carter was the better player and it was because he showed up and played every day. Eric Davis was flashy and looked like a world beater when healthy but his style of play led to many trips to the DL.

Michael Vick is getting an MRI today instead of going to practice and preparing for next week. When he's not in there the entire offense changes...the playbook, the way the O-line blocks...everything. The risk isn't worth it.

I'll take a big durable pocket passer like CP or Ben with some mobility. I don't want a statue back there like Bernie Kosar... ;)

Sabo Fan
09-19-2005, 06:24 PM
Do you know which quarterback in the NFL sustained the TOP QB Rating from November of last season through this weekend?

Carson Palmer, that's who. Carson Palmer is in his second year and is putting up numbers easily comparable to Daunte Culpepper who is now playing in his SEVENTH. Daunte's career is likely at least already halfway finished. Carson's is just beginning. The Bengals are on the way up. The Vikings?? I'm not going to pronounce them dead yet; LOL, look at their division, you've gotta try REALLY hard not to be in the mix of things.

Lots can change from week to week, there's no doubt about that.

However: You're not going to find many people willing to trade Carson Palmer for Daunte Culpepper.

The only QBs I would trade Carson Palmer for are Peyton Manning and Mike Vick. I'm not even sure that Vick would be a better QB for the Bengals... actually, it is doubtful. I still couldn't pass up that excitement.

Daunte Culpepper? Pass.

Hmmm... oh, yeah, Culpepper "LED" the Vikings to the NFC Championship game against the NY Giants. LOL, let's hope that that doesn't remain as the highlight of his career.

Passing
Daunte Culpepper 13-28 for 78 yards, 3 INT, 0 TD.

Avg. Yards per pass 1.9

Fumbles Lost
Daunte Culpepper, Moe Williams

Final Score: NY Giants 41 - Minnesota Vikings 0

The thing is, I'm willing to give the guy a mulligan on that one. He was, after all, only in his second year. Please, however, don't try and make that out to be some sort of glowing endorsement of his QB prowess. After all, he put up a big goose egg with 3 INTs w/ Randy Moss and Cris Carter out there running routes for him. If he had continued to improve after that season, your argument that he's Carson's superior might hold more weight. I have not, however, seen any performances from Daunte Culpepper that suggest he is anything more than a QB with average accuracy and an above-average arm with the ability to throw Randy Moss a bomb.

Will Carson continue to progress? All signs point to yes; Irregardless: Compare his current abilities with those of Culpepper along with HIS current ceiling and DAUNTE'S ceiling for improvement. It is obvious which QB stands the best chance to improve his game, and, therefore, be more valuable to an NFL team.

I heard a really interesting quote on Daunte's performances against the Bucs and Bengals... I can't remember the guys name, but he usually comes up with some pretty good stuff.
"During Daunte's tenure with the Vikes, there would be 2-3 times per game when he would just run around in the backfield and launch the ball downfield where it would be caught by Randy Moss.
The funny thing is, he's still trying to play that way."

We disagree. Calling a hail mary to Randy Moss does not constitute brilliant play calling. Losing the O-Linemen hurts, no doubt about it, but that's not the biggest reason the Vikings have been struggling.

Maybe Daunte will improve, and I hope that he does, but as things stand right now, he appears to have been exposed as a guy who garnered lots of success riding the coattails of Randy Moss.

Where to start... that's fantastic that Palmer has been very good in what, his last eight games or so. No doubt he's a talented quarterback who is on the upswing. However, I'd like to wait for him to get a full year in before I go proclaiming him to be the second best QB in the NFL (which is essentially what you're saying). You hear all the time about small sample size and that concerns me with Palmer. He's good, no question, but I'll take Culpepper over Palmer every time. Moss certainly helped him, but couldn't you make the same case that Chad Johnson helps Carson Palmer out? Culpepper's career QB rating is 91.5 and he has a career completion percentage just a bit under 65%. I don't care who you are, there is no QB that can put up those numbers if he was just a byproduct of a great wide receiver. Are we suddenly going to knock the likes of Montana and Young down a notch because they had Jerry Rice? No, and you would be crazy to. So why is it any different with Culpepper? He's proven he's a big-time player in this league.

Then let's take a look at that 2000 NFC Championship game. Before Culpepper even set foot on the field he was down 14-0 and facing a team playing downhill. Add in one awful defense that gave up points at an alarming rate and again you have a situation no QB can succeed in. That game was essentially over by the time he took the first snap. Oh, and he did lead them to that game, throwing 33 TD passes with 16 interceptions and a QB rating of 98.0 that year. Not too bad.

Don't get me wrong here; Culpepper has struggled very badly at times. His 2001 and 2002 seasons were very poor, but he was playing on teams that were also very poor. Having to score 35 points a game isn't a good thing to ask a young QB to do. You may not be willing to look past the raw numbers those two years, but I watched just about every game during those two seasons and can tell you that he was a QB trying to shoulder way too much of the load, much like he is this season. It was a recipe for an injury those years (he missed the final five games of the 2001 season) and I worry it might be the same this year. Even during those two years he put up respectable numbers in the completion percentage department of 61 and 64. In 2002, he tossed for 3800 yards. Not too bad for a team that went 6-10.

When I look at Daunte Culpepper I see the second-most physically gifted QB in the league (behind Vick, though in his case I think I'd trade some of that insane physical ability for a few more points of completion percentage). The guy has linebacker size, great arm strength and mobility, and has shown over his career to be a very accurate passer. I understand not wanting to trade Palmer for Culpepper, but I don't think you would find too many NFL personnel guys who wouldn't if the two were the same age, made the same money, etc.

Look at Culpepper's 2004 season. If you do, take it in, because you're looking at one of the best statistical seasons for a QB of all-time. Don't take my word for it, look at what the pundits said about it and do the research, you'll see the same thing. 41 TD's (2 running), a completion percentage of 70%, a rating of 111. Look at those numbers and tell me that's a "QB with average accuracy and an above-average arm with the ability to throw Randy Moss a bomb," as you so eloquently stated. Do you work for the Browns by any chance?

I don't know who wrote the quote you cited, but he's way off. In fact, the opposite is true. Sure they'd throw the bomb to Moss 2-3 times a game, but so would every other offensive coordinator worth a darn. I don't see how that's an indictment of Culpepper's ability, that's just maximizing the talent of your personnel. Now though, Culpepper seems to be looking to throw shorter routes to his receivers all the time. I haven't seen him take more than three shots downfield through the first two games. What's happened is that defenses know they have no running game so they can drop the safeties back and wait for him to throw. There is no consistent deep threat on the Vikings right now so there's no reason to double anyone and it forces Culpepper to thread the needle every time and force the ball into coverage. No QB can succeed with no running game, a center and right guard who resemble turnstiles and who is also playing behind most of the time. None. Simply cannot happen.

Bottom line here: Culpepper has proven that he is an elite NFL quarterback, despite his awful start to 2005. Unfortunately, it seems as though a lot of Viking fans share your mindset that he's only an average QB and seem ready to throw him under the bus. Fortunately for the Vikings though they have good front office people and an owner who know better. I have no doubt that he'll turn things around and return to form at some point this season. I wish I knew when that will be, but there was so much off-season change at key positions that it's difficult to tell when things will get straightened out.

Betterread
09-19-2005, 10:17 PM
Would the Bengals trade Carson Palmer for Daunte Culpepper? They wouldn't trade Carson for Daunte, EVER. Carson is a more accurate passer, and is further along development-wise 3 years in than Daunte is at this point in his career. Not sure how many years he's been in the league.

You're free to have your opinion.
But Daunte career completion percentage is 64.3 to Palmer's 62.5 (this is after 2 excellent games and his percentage this year is over 71% - and if you think Palmer will sustain that this year, then you believe the Bengals will go 16-0) so your assertion is not backed up by quantitative fact.
Also, Daunte has won a couple of playoff games and at least gotten to the NFC championship. We both know how far Palmer has gone in the postseason. How many "big" games has he won. I'm trying to remember. Can you help jog my memory?
Your comparison of their success at the same stage of their development is flawed as Daunte threw 33 TDs in his second year.
And finally, don't indulge in trashing Daunte. He plays the game the right way, and has a great deal of character. If you are the kind of person that values integrity, hard work, humility and accountability, you should not be ripping Daunte.

WMR
09-19-2005, 10:54 PM
Where to start... that's fantastic that Palmer has been very good in what, his last eight games or so. No doubt he's a talented quarterback who is on the upswing. However, I'd like to wait for him to get a full year in before I go proclaiming him to be the second best QB in the NFL (which is essentially what you're saying). You hear all the time about small sample size and that concerns me with Palmer. He's good, no question, but I'll take Culpepper over Palmer every time. Moss certainly helped him, but couldn't you make the same case that Chad Johnson helps Carson Palmer out? Culpepper's career QB rating is 91.5 and he has a career completion percentage just a bit under 65%. I don't care who you are, there is no QB that can put up those numbers if he was just a byproduct of a great wide receiver. Are we suddenly going to knock the likes of Montana and Young down a notch because they had Jerry Rice? No, and you would be crazy to. So why is it any different with Culpepper? He's proven he's a big-time player in this league.

Then let's take a look at that 2000 NFC Championship game. Before Culpepper even set foot on the field he was down 14-0 and facing a team playing downhill. Add in one awful defense that gave up points at an alarming rate and again you have a situation no QB can succeed in. That game was essentially over by the time he took the first snap. Oh, and he did lead them to that game, throwing 33 TD passes with 16 interceptions and a QB rating of 98.0 that year. Not too bad.

Don't get me wrong here; Culpepper has struggled very badly at times. His 2001 and 2002 seasons were very poor, but he was playing on teams that were also very poor. Having to score 35 points a game isn't a good thing to ask a young QB to do. You may not be willing to look past the raw numbers those two years, but I watched just about every game during those two seasons and can tell you that he was a QB trying to shoulder way too much of the load, much like he is this season. It was a recipe for an injury those years (he missed the final five games of the 2001 season) and I worry it might be the same this year. Even during those two years he put up respectable numbers in the completion percentage department of 61 and 64. In 2002, he tossed for 3800 yards. Not too bad for a team that went 6-10.

When I look at Daunte Culpepper I see the second-most physically gifted QB in the league (behind Vick, though in his case I think I'd trade some of that insane physical ability for a few more points of completion percentage). The guy has linebacker size, great arm strength and mobility, and has shown over his career to be a very accurate passer. I understand not wanting to trade Palmer for Culpepper, but I don't think you would find too many NFL personnel guys who wouldn't if the two were the same age, made the same money, etc.

Look at Culpepper's 2004 season. If you do, take it in, because you're looking at one of the best statistical seasons for a QB of all-time. Don't take my word for it, look at what the pundits said about it and do the research, you'll see the same thing. 41 TD's (2 running), a completion percentage of 70%, a rating of 111. Look at those numbers and tell me that's a "QB with average accuracy and an above-average arm with the ability to throw Randy Moss a bomb," as you so eloquently stated. Do you work for the Browns by any chance?

I don't know who wrote the quote you cited, but he's way off. In fact, the opposite is true. Sure they'd throw the bomb to Moss 2-3 times a game, but so would every other offensive coordinator worth a darn. I don't see how that's an indictment of Culpepper's ability, that's just maximizing the talent of your personnel. Now though, Culpepper seems to be looking to throw shorter routes to his receivers all the time. I haven't seen him take more than three shots downfield through the first two games. What's happened is that defenses know they have no running game so they can drop the safeties back and wait for him to throw. There is no consistent deep threat on the Vikings right now so there's no reason to double anyone and it forces Culpepper to thread the needle every time and force the ball into coverage. No QB can succeed with no running game, a center and right guard who resemble turnstiles and who is also playing behind most of the time. None. Simply cannot happen.

Bottom line here: Culpepper has proven that he is an elite NFL quarterback, despite his awful start to 2005. Unfortunately, it seems as though a lot of Viking fans share your mindset that he's only an average QB and seem ready to throw him under the bus. Fortunately for the Vikings though they have good front office people and an owner who know better. I have no doubt that he'll turn things around and return to form at some point this season. I wish I knew when that will be, but there was so much off-season change at key positions that it's difficult to tell when things will get straightened out.

Interesting post, Sabo Fan.

I don't hold any animosity towards Daunte; I wish him the best.

As they say, the proof is in the pudding.

If he's as great a QB as you profess, then I fully expect him to rise above losing his O-Coordinator, 2-linemen, and Randy Moss and find a way to at least make his team competitive. He certainly can't do it by himself, and I don't watch Daunte Culpepper play nearly as much as you do, but he can't use those aforementioned "situations" as excuses for why he cannot lead his team to success.

Betterread
09-19-2005, 11:08 PM
Interesting post, Sabo Fan.

I don't hold any animosity towards Daunte; I wish him the best.

As they say, the proof is in the pudding.

If he's as great a QB as you profess, then I fully expect him to rise above losing his O-Coordinator, 2-linemen, and Randy Moss and find a way to at least make his team competitive. He certainly can't do it by himself, and I don't watch Daunte Culpepper play nearly as much as you do, but he can't use those aforementioned "situations" as excuses for why he cannot lead his team to success.

Daunte has not the excuses you have attributed to him, as far as I know. Can you find the quotes that you have attributed to him?
If you cannot, I will assume you are making them up. Not that this would hurt your credibility any.

WMR
09-19-2005, 11:11 PM
You're free to have your opinion.
But Daunte career completion percentage is 64.3 to Palmer's 62.5 (this is after 2 excellent games and his percentage this year is over 71% - and if you think Palmer will sustain that this year, then you believe the Bengals will go 16-0) so your assertion is not backed up by quantitative fact.
Also, Daunte has won a couple of playoff games and at least gotten to the NFC championship. We both know how far Palmer has gone in the postseason. How many "big" games has he won. I'm trying to remember. Can you help jog my memory?
Your comparison of their success at the same stage of their development is flawed as Daunte threw 33 TDs in his second year.
And finally, don't indulge in trashing Daunte. He plays the game the right way, and has a great deal of character. If you are the kind of person that values integrity, hard work, humility and accountability, you should not be ripping Daunte.

I don't use completion percentage in my ranking of QBs. It isn't really a very good measuring stick in measuring overall QB-effectiveness. Sort of reminds me of BA in a way.

Well, I would contend that every game in the NFL is "a big game." Some of the performances engineered by Palmer, esp. in the 2nd half last year, were nothing short of amazing for a 1st year starter. Some much more impressive starts and performances than ones put together by Ben Roethlisberger. I'm not calling him Dan Marino just yet, however. I'm only talking about Carson's POTENTIAL for greatness as well as how PROMISING his early returns have been.

Nothing I've said about Daunte has been said with the intention of "ripping him." I'm into analysis, and I'm very curious to see how Daunte performs without his security blanket, and, to this point, he has suffered mightily.

Saying that I would take Carson over Daunte is NOT a slam on Daunte. Rather, it demonstrates in what sort of esteem I hold Carson Palmer. I think the guy has got the tools and the BRAINS (just as important; lacking by many) to be one of the greats. Not to mention a surrounding cast that can truly enable him to shine.

As for other big game performances: They don't give those Heisman's out for good looks. Carson set a lot of PAC-10 records at USC and played in enough big games, performing admirably, that I've got no doubt that any situation isn't going to "be too big for him."

Betterread
09-19-2005, 11:12 PM
Sabo Fan - Some good news, in case you weren't aware of it.

Vikings, Anoka County reach stadium deal
Kevin Seifert, Star Tribune
September 19, 2005 STADIUM0919.OL




The Vikings will announce tomorrow an agreement to build a $675 million stadium and related development in Anoka County.

A press conference has been scheduled for 10 a.m. Tuesday in Blaine, near the site where new owner Zygi Wilf plans to build the structure with a retractable roof, a Vikings team official said.

Wilf and the NFL plan to combine on at least $250 million contribution, while Anoka County will provide at least $240 million through a county-wide sales tax.

The Vikings and Anoka County will ask the state to make up the rest likely in infrastructure costs.

"We've been working around the clock and we are just putting the finishing touches on the agreement,'' Vikings executive Lester Bagley said Monday.

While he wouldn't detail the entire agreement, Bagley said it calls for the football stadium as part of a broader development project.

The county would seek permission from the state Legislature to enact a 0.75 percent sales tax to help pay for construction and ask for the state to chip in for road projects around the site.

Last week, new Vikings owner Zygi Wilf held a series of private meetings with top lawmakers, including Gov. Tim Pawlenty, about the stadium.

At those meetings, he told the elected officials he was willing to contribute at least $250 million to the project.

House Minority Leader Matt Entenza, DFL-St. Paul, said Wilf has gotten off on the right foot.

"There's always going to be a lot of uneasiness about funding stadiums, but Zygi is doing a good job by making it clear we won't be blackmailed by the threat of a team leaving,'' Entenza said.

How the plan will fare though is another matter, and Entenza said he'd withhold judgment until seeing it in writing.

Gov. Tim Pawlenty's spokesman, Brian McClung, said the governor is "open to finding a reasonable way to ensure their long-term presence in Minnesota.''

"The governor will be communicating with legislative leaders regarding stadiums and other issues shortly,'' McClung said. "We will evaluate the Vikings proposal in that context.''

The Vikings stadium, parking lot, training facility and team headquarters would comprise 200 acres of the 740-acre overall Blaine development, which would also have retail space.

The Vikings are under lease to play in the Metrodome until 2011. But the team has argued that the Dome is outdated. The Vikings rank near the bottom of the league in local revenue.

Julie Shortridge, a county spokeswoman, said Anoka officials wouldn't comment until the news conference.

The state has already put a nominal amount of money toward a new football stadium.

In 2002, the Legislature provided $500,000 for football stadium design, but that was when the Vikings and University of Minnesota were trying to team up on a single facility.

The Gophers are pursuing state money toward a $235 million on-campus stadium without a roof. The school is rounding up private dollars for 60 percent of it.

This summer, lawmakers put off action on that proposal and one from the Minnesota Twins, which have joined with Hennepin County on a downtown ballpark plan that also relies on a higher local sales tax.

John Knight, a Minnetonka lawyer who co-founded a residents group to fight the Twins bill, said stadium supporters are on the wrong side of public opinion. His group, Citizens for a Stadium Tax Referendum, wants a public vote on any local tax used for a stadium.

"The people with a vested interest who want a stadium tax subsidy kind of remind me of a used car salesman ó the longer they keep trying, they more they wear you down,'' Knight said. "Generally, when you go to buy a car, the longer you are at the dealer, the more likely it is you are going to get screwed.''

WMR
09-19-2005, 11:18 PM
Daunte has not the excuses you have attributed to him, as far as I know. Can you find the quotes that you have attributed to him?
If you cannot, I will assume you are making them up. Not that this would hurt your credibility any.

Read what I posted. READ IT AGAIN.

I WAS SPEAKING IN THE FUTURE TENSE. I WAS NOT ATTRIBUTING ANY QUOTE TO DAUNTE CULPEPPER. I DON'T KNOW WHAT HE HAS SAID ABOUT ANYTHING, NOR DO I CARE.

Funny, as the one who came on this thread telling me to stop acting rude and aggressive, you're the one who has come across as acting rude, aggressive, and mentally wayward.

Try reading a post and making sure you actually understand it b/f you start ripping the poster's credibility.

paintmered
09-19-2005, 11:20 PM
Read what I posted. READ IT AGAIN.

I WAS SPEAKING IN THE FUTURE TENSE. I WAS NOT ATTRIBUTING ANY QUOTE TO DAUNTE CULPEPPER. I DON'T KNOW WHAT HE HAS SAID ABOUT ANYTHING, NOR DO I CARE.

Funny, as the one who came on this thread telling me to stop acting rude and aggressive, you're the one who has come across as acting rude, aggressive, and mentally wayward.

Try reading a post and making sure you actually understand it b/f you start ripping the poster's credibility.


Relax, killer.

Betterread
09-19-2005, 11:32 PM
Like Daunte would admit how badly he needed Randy... Actually, I doubt he admitted in part because in his own mind he thought that he could indeed be just as successful without Randy. I don't care if Rich Brooks is calling the plays, you put a quarterback with a strong arm on the field with Randy Moss and Randy Moss is going to make that

Daunte Culpepper was suffering from the same delusions... "Randy doesn't matter" "I can still be just as good a QB w/o Randy" blah blah blah

Maybe he's beginning to come back to reality.

I read your posts as you demanded. I am looking for the "future tense" you describe and this is what I found.
Perhaps you think that you write one thing, while actually writing something else. That is an example of inarticulation.
It's quite common on sports boards. I am guilty of it too, from time to time.

WMR
09-19-2005, 11:41 PM
As to those quotes you highlighted from a previous post: Yes, Daunte said words very similar to that. I only know that b/c I heard a soundbite on ESPN Radio. He said that he and the vikings could be just as good w/o Randy and implied that losing Randy would not be a detriment to their success.

I don't blame him for saying those things. He's a competitor; any great competitor would say something similar.

When I spoke of future tense I was referring to post #51 in this thread. I never said Daunte was making excuses for losing; just that he "Can't use those aforementioned situations as excuses for why he cannot lead his team to success." And I wouldn't expect him to.

MWM
09-19-2005, 11:48 PM
I'd take Carson Palmer RIGHT NOW over Culpepper without blinking an eye. I don't care about career completion percentage. I'l take Palmer. He's better, IMO.

Betterread
09-20-2005, 12:01 AM
You have the right to brag. The Bengals whipped the Vikings. You're simplyexercising a fan's right to brag and boast. I respect that. And I'm simply defending Daunte after two horrible performances, which you should be able to understand.

WMR
09-20-2005, 12:02 AM
That is cool. I don't fault you for that. Believe me, as a long-suffering Bengals fan, I've been explaining away crappy performances longer than I can remember.

Sabo Fan
09-20-2005, 01:29 AM
I don't use completion percentage in my ranking of QBs. It isn't really a very good measuring stick in measuring overall QB-effectiveness. Sort of reminds me of BA in a way.

Well, I would contend that every game in the NFL is "a big game." Some of the performances engineered by Palmer, esp. in the 2nd half last year, were nothing short of amazing for a 1st year starter. Some much more impressive starts and performances than ones put together by Ben Roethlisberger. I'm not calling him Dan Marino just yet, however. I'm only talking about Carson's POTENTIAL for greatness as well as how PROMISING his early returns have been.

Nothing I've said about Daunte has been said with the intention of "ripping him." I'm into analysis, and I'm very curious to see how Daunte performs without his security blanket, and, to this point, he has suffered mightily.

Saying that I would take Carson over Daunte is NOT a slam on Daunte. Rather, it demonstrates in what sort of esteem I hold Carson Palmer. I think the guy has got the tools and the BRAINS (just as important; lacking by many) to be one of the greats. Not to mention a surrounding cast that can truly enable him to shine.

As for other big game performances: They don't give those Heisman's out for good looks. Carson set a lot of PAC-10 records at USC and played in enough big games, performing admirably, that I've got no doubt that any situation isn't going to "be too big for him."

I don't know about relating batting average to completion percentage. True, a QB's completion percentage depends on his recievers somewhat, but I think it's a fairly good measure, as are passer rating and quarterback rating.

Like you, I like what I see from Carson Palmer. However, I'd like to see more before I throw accolades upon him. You mention his supporting cast that "enables him to shine." Interesting that you don't give the same leeway to Culpepper. In the past Culpepper had a supporting cast that allowed him to shine, yet you passed it off as merely a byproduct of have Randy Moss to throw to. Yet Palmer's current success is because of his talent alone? Don't think so.

Put Palmer in Daunte's current position: no running game to speak of, the loss of Chad Johnson (only moreso, because I think we can all agree Moss is the better player), two starting offensive linemen gone, and a new offensive coordinator. What would Palmer's stat line look like then? My guess is that it wouldn't be that great. Would you be as supportive of Palmer then as you are now. I doubt it.

What I'm trying to say is if all things were equal, how would you rank Palmer and Culpepper? Granted there is a significant age difference, but in his prime do you think Palmer can put up numbers like Culpepper's 2004 season? You'd say yes I'm sure, but I don't know, the sample size is just too small. Me, I'd take the known quantity over the one that, to me, is still somewhat unproven.

WMR
09-20-2005, 02:10 AM
I don't know about relating batting average to completion percentage. True, a QB's completion percentage depends on his recievers somewhat, but I think it's a fairly good measure, as are passer rating and quarterback rating.

Like you, I like what I see from Carson Palmer. However, I'd like to see more before I throw accolades upon him. You mention his supporting cast that "enables him to shine." Interesting that you don't give the same leeway to Culpepper. In the past Culpepper had a supporting cast that allowed him to shine, yet you passed it off as merely a byproduct of have Randy Moss to throw to. Yet Palmer's current success is because of his talent alone? Don't think so.

Put Palmer in Daunte's current position: no running game to speak of, the loss of Chad Johnson (only moreso, because I think we can all agree Moss is the better player), two starting offensive linemen gone, and a new offensive coordinator. What would Palmer's stat line look like then? My guess is that it wouldn't be that great. Would you be as supportive of Palmer then as you are now. I doubt it.

What I'm trying to say is if all things were equal, how would you rank Palmer and Culpepper? Granted there is a significant age difference, but in his prime do you think Palmer can put up numbers like Culpepper's 2004 season? You'd say yes I'm sure, but I don't know, the sample size is just too small. Me, I'd take the known quantity over the one that, to me, is still somewhat unproven.

I would be interested to see what % of Daunte's TD passes and overall passes were attempted/caught by Randy Moss. I honestly don't know what those stats would look like, but it might provide a better idea as to just how much Daunte relied on Randy to put points on the board...

Likewise, although the sample size is much smaller, I would be interested to see similar splits between Carson and Chad Johnson.

The Bengals suffered more injuries last year than just about any other team in the NFL. A few key offensive cogs missed significant portions of the season: Carson still did great work.

Yes, as I said, I agree with you: Carson has got a long way to go and a lot to prove. I'm not considering the guys at the same age, however. I'm considering Carson in his 3rd season and Daunte in his 7th. From that perspective, combined with what I have seen from Carson and his progression, as well as his superior collegiate lineage, I take Carson. Just MO. I would certainly understand if a Vikes fan feels otherwise. That's why they're your team and the Bengals are my team. One of us will be proven correct, but, as they say, that's why they play the games.

WMR
09-20-2005, 02:17 AM
This season's stats will probably be a better barometer of Carson Palmer's reliance on Chad Johnson. With the addition of these new receivers, will Carson utilize every receiver on the field, or will he resort to Chad Johnson more often than he should? (is that possible? LOL just ask Chad)

To me, thats the mark of a great QB. The ability to move through reads and complete passes to your third, fourth, and even fifth options on a consistent basis. That's what makes Peyton Manning so much fun to watch.

Sea Ray
09-20-2005, 11:02 AM
What's the point in comparing what Culpepper did while Palmer was in high school?

Thus far Culpepper has had the superior career. The reason us Bengal fans would prefer Palmer to Culpepper is because Carson is the up and coming QB and Culpepper's career has peaked. We're looking to the future while the Vikings are on the downswing.

As to this discussion if I'm a Viking fan I'm thrilled with what Culpepper has given me and I'd be fine with hanging onto him for a few more years. But if you're offered Carson Palmer or Ben Roethlisberger for him you'd be fired as a GM if you said no.

Sea Ray
09-20-2005, 11:11 AM
Granted there is a significant age difference, but in his prime do you think Palmer can put up numbers like Culpepper's 2004 season? You'd say yes I'm sure, but I don't know, the sample size is just too small. Me, I'd take the known quantity over the one that, to me, is still somewhat unproven.

Don't cop out and say you don't know. C'mon, we're fans here trying to evaluate talent. Palmer is unproven.

I'll go on record as saying yes, I think Palmer can put up numbers in his prime equal to Culpepper's 2004. No one knows for sure. But we all like to play GM and that's what running a team is all about. How accurately can you project a player.

Do you think Palmer will put up numbers as good as Culpepper's best year or are you going to plead the 5th again? Tell us yes or no and why you think that way. That's what this board is all about...

WMR
09-20-2005, 11:12 AM
But if you're offered Carson Palmer or Ben Roethlisberger for him you'd be fired as a GM if you said no.

No. You are wrong. Unequivocally and Absolutely. The Bengals would not trade Carson Palmer for Daunte Culpepper.

WMR
09-20-2005, 11:13 AM
I'm comparing Palmer in his 2nd year to Culpepper in his 7th; and I like what I see.

Sea Ray
09-20-2005, 11:24 AM
I understand not wanting to trade Palmer for Culpepper, but I don't think you would find too many NFL personnel guys who wouldn't if the two were the same age, made the same money, etc.

Who added the caveat "if the two were the same age, made the money etc"? They'll never be the same age so why add that in? You said you understand not trading Palmer for Daunte so we're in agreement. That's all I've been saying.

Now if you want to compare the two at the same age then you have to go back to their senior year in college. Palmer was a Heisman Trophy winner and was the #1 pick in the draft. Culpepper was the 5th QB taken that year, so the NFL personnel guys you refer to seem to have preferred Palmer.

Sea Ray
09-20-2005, 11:28 AM
No. You are wrong. Unequivocally and Absolutely. The Bengals would not trade Carson Palmer for Daunte Culpepper.

I guess I didn't make my point clear. Let me rephrase it with more detail.

If I'm GM of the Minnesota Vikings and I'm offered Carson Palmer or Ben Roethlisberger one for one for Daunte Culpepper and I say "no thanks", I'll hang onto Culpepper, you'd be fired as GM of the Vikings.

WMR
09-20-2005, 11:29 AM
No. You are wrong. Unequivocally and Absolutely. The Bengals would not trade Carson Palmer for Daunte Culpepper.

Sorry about that Sea Ray, I mistook what you said as meaning that if you were the Steelers or Bengals, you'd be crazy for saying no to receiving Daunte for Carson or Ben.

Patrick Bateman
09-20-2005, 02:06 PM
Sorry about that Sea Ray, I mistook what you said as meaning that if you were the Steelers or Bengals, you'd be crazy for saying no to receiving Daunte for Carson or Ben.


I'll have to quote you on this one: "try reading a post and make sure you actually understand it b/f you start ripping the poster's crdibility".

I suggest you follow your own advice next time.

CTA513
09-20-2005, 02:17 PM
I'll have to quote you on this one: "try reading a post and make sure you actually understand it b/f you start ripping the poster's crdibility".

I suggest you follow your own advice next time.


:runawaycr

Falls City Beer
09-20-2005, 02:24 PM
I'll have to quote you on this one: "try reading a post and make sure you actually understand it b/f you start ripping the poster's crdibility".

I suggest you follow your own advice next time.

Well, he did apologize. Not something you see around here too often.

Patrick Bateman
09-20-2005, 02:53 PM
Well, he did apologize. Not something you see around here too often.

I do give WMR credit for that but I still think he was a little harsh to BR when it was a mistake anybody (including himself) could easily make.

WMR
09-20-2005, 03:16 PM
I'll have to quote you on this one: "try reading a post and make sure you actually understand it b/f you start ripping the poster's crdibility".

I suggest you follow your own advice next time.

Well, I wasn't trying to be a jerk about things, but, reading his post, it could be interpreted either way and still be interpreted correctly. He even went so far as to clarify his statement w/o questioning my statement concerning his previous post. I think he understood that his post was vague, and corrected the vagueness.

When he clarified his position, I retracted my statement...

Is it really that boring in Canada?

WMR
09-20-2005, 03:19 PM
I do give WMR credit for that but I still think he was a little harsh to BR when it was a mistake anybody (including himself) could easily make.

The link between what I posted and what Betterread posted is tenuous at best.

He questioned my honesty and integrity.

I merely restated my position while refuting Sea Ray's post which could have been interpreted either way.

Blimpie
09-20-2005, 03:23 PM
Well, I wasn't trying to be a jerk about things, but, reading his post, it could be interpreted either way and still be interpreted correctly. He even went so far as to clarify his statement w/o questioning my statement concerning his previous post. I think he understood that his post was vague, and corrected the vagueness.

When he clarified his position, I retracted my statement...

Is it really that boring in Canada?Unless is involves a puck, I would say 'yes'...eh?

Sea Ray
09-20-2005, 05:11 PM
Well, I wasn't trying to be a jerk about things, but, reading his post, it could be interpreted either way and still be interpreted correctly. He even went so far as to clarify his statement w/o questioning my statement concerning his previous post. I think he understood that his post was vague, and corrected the vagueness.

When he clarified his position, I retracted my statement...


Exactly. As we get to typing away and multitasking Lord knows what else at the same time, we tend to not be as clear as we'd like. I never gave it another thought...I just clarified my position and moved on.

Sabo Fan
09-20-2005, 05:52 PM
Who added the caveat "if the two were the same age, made the money etc"? They'll never be the same age so why add that in? You said you understand not trading Palmer for Daunte so we're in agreement. That's all I've been saying.

Now if you want to compare the two at the same age then you have to go back to their senior year in college. Palmer was a Heisman Trophy winner and was the #1 pick in the draft. Culpepper was the 5th QB taken that year, so the NFL personnel guys you refer to seem to have preferred Palmer.

I did, and I stand by my statement. What I was saying is that from a pure talent standpoint, Culpepper is the superior quarterback. I believe, and you'll undoubtedly disagree with me, that Daunte is the second-most physically gifted quarterback in the league, behind Vick. Mobile, huge, big arm, etc.

Go back and take a look at that draft. Culpepper was the fourth quarterback taken, after Couch, McNabb, and Akili Smith. Cade McNown was taken with the pick right after Minnesota. You surely meant that as a slight to Culpepper, but look at that draft class. You think any of those teams want those picks back now? You bet they would, with the exception of two. Don't slight Culpepper because other teams made poor draft choices.

Dig further into that draft and you'll find lots of people who said that without a doubt, Culpepper was the most physically gifted of the group. The problem was that he played at a small school (UCF) and no one was quite sure how those skills would translate. Me, I think they translated pretty well. Palmer on the other hand, was on a national powerhouse and got tons of media exposure. I wouldn't put too much stock into the Heisman Trophy either. Look up and down that list and you'll find plenty of winners who never even came close to being serviceable NFLers. Not a great indicator of future success, though the early returns on Palmerís career are very encouraging.


Don't cop out and say you don't know. C'mon, we're fans here trying to evaluate talent. Palmer is unproven.

I'll go on record as saying yes, I think Palmer can put up numbers in his prime equal to Culpepper's 2004. No one knows for sure. But we all like to play GM and that's what running a team is all about. How accurately can you project a player.

Do you think Palmer will put up numbers as good as Culpepper's best year or are you going to plead the 5th again? Tell us yes or no and why you think that way. That's what this board is all about...

For the record, I don't need you to tell me what I need to take a stance on and what I don't. Thanks.

But so as to indulge you, I'll say that no, I don't think Carson Palmer can put up numbers that approach Culpepper's 2004 season. Take a look: 41 TD's, 70% completion percentage, 111 QB rating, 5,100 total yards. That in my book is downright unconscious. Palmer will be a very good quarterback, a consistent 30 TD guy, and he may have a crazy year like Culpepper did, but I doubt it. He just doesn't seem to me to be a guy whose attributes are off the charts. Very solid all-around, but nothing he does makes me sit back and say "wow." When I see Culpepper shrug off a blitzing linebacker and then immediately chuck the ball 50 yards downfield, that makes me say "wow." The only real advantage I see that Palmer has over Culpepper is age. Even that though isn't huge, Daunte is just 28, certainly not over-the-hill by any means.

All this talk about whether or not to trade Culpepper for Palmer seems ridiculous to me, though for a different reason I'm sure. If I'm the GM of a team that is looking to compete for a Super Bowl right now, I want Culpepper as my quarterback over Palmer. More experience, better all-around athlete. Palmer is better off being on a younger team where he can better assume a leadership role and grow with the rest of his team. You all probably think I'm crazy, but a GM who turns down a Palmer for Culpepper trade (he'd be the one getting Palmer) would not immediately lose his job. You could make the case that if you're the 49ers or Browns or any other rebuilding team that a trade like that makes sense because the goal is to get younger. Otherwise, you're taking a step back.


The reason us Bengal fans would prefer Palmer to Culpepper is because Carson is the up and coming QB and Culpepper's career has peaked. We're looking to the future while the Vikings are on the downswing.

I really don't know where to start.

Let me get this straight: you're saying that at the age of 28, Culpepper has peaked? That means it's all downhill from here, right? No continuation, but rather a sudden drop-off in production. Iím saying that because itís the only way you can justify wanting Palmer as your quarterback over Culpepper.

Just exactly what makes you think that? Let me say this again: he is 28 years old. I don't know of too many quarterbacks who suddenly fell off the face of the planet after two Pro Bowl seasons at the ages of 26 and 27. Granted, his numbers couldn't get much better than they did last year, but going into this season there was no reason to believe they would drop-off dramatically. While his first two games have been bad, I said before that I have no doubt he will rebound as soon as things get settled around him and put up comparable numbers.

The Vikings are on the downswing? Well thank goodness you let me know, because otherwise I might be getting my hopes up for the next couple of years without any reason to. I mean, a team with a great young defensive line that includes possibly the premier DT in the game in Kevin Williams, some promising young linebackers and two top-shelf cornerbacks who have at least four years of top-flight production left is probably cause for concern.

Things are even worse on the other side of the ball, come to think of it. According to you, Culpepper's career is sure to go downhill from here, and surely the offensive line shows no promise, what with Bryant McKinnie, Mike Rosenthal, Marcus Johnson, Adam Goldberg and Chris Liwienski all on their last legs (for those wondering, Johnson was a second round pick in 2004, McKinnie is 26, Goldberg is 25, Rosenthal is 28, and Liwienski is the elder statesman of the group at 30. This doesn't include Matt Birk, who is 29, but I didn't list him at first because of the questions surrounding his health).

Looking at the wide receivers things just get worse, seeing as how Burleson is obviously done at the age of 24, as is Troy Williamson at 22, Travis Taylor at 26, and newcomer Koren Robinson at 25. What about running backs, you ask? Certainly they paint a dark picture as well. Mewelde Moore is in his second year, Ciatrick Fason is a rookie, Onterrio Smith (assuming he can stay off the Ricky Williams health program) will be in his fourth year when/if he returns next year and Michael Bennett is 27.

You know, maybe you have a point. Looks to me as though there will certainly be rough times ahead for this team, especially since they have no cap room to go out and add/retain players and an owner who doesn't want to win.



Now I think I'll take your advice and tell you what I really think and not "cop out" as you say: you could not possibly be more wrong about the Vikings. Next time, do your homework before you go spouting off about who's finished and on the downswing. Trust me, we'll all be better for it.

This is very much an up and coming team. More so now because we have an owner willing to spend and will again have the cap room to do it in the off season. Maybe the preseason Super Bowl hype was premature (I don't think so, this is as talented a team as I've seen in Minnesota since I've been around, with the possible exception of 1998, though that team was skewed way towards offensive talent), but they are by no means headed for trouble because of a lack of young talent. Maybe you should look away from that bright shining sun that is the Bengals, put on some sunglasses and look around the league, because believe it or not there are other franchises with just as much promise as your wonderful Cincinnati Bengals.

Patrick Bateman
09-20-2005, 06:10 PM
Well, I wasn't trying to be a jerk about things


Well IMO you were. your post was condescending and could have been refuted in a different way. Your point was extremely hypocritical. My point is you made the same mistake and in one instance you were insulting and in another very apologetic. Just stay consistent.

wheels
09-20-2005, 06:23 PM
I'm a Bengals fan, and I totally agree with SaboFan's assesment.

The Vikings are in a transition year, and once that O line gets healthy, we'll see a marked improvement in Daunte Culpepper's numbers.

Nobody this side of Dan Marino and Peyton Manning have put up the kind of numbers he did in '04, and as I recall last year was thought to be Nate Burleson's coming out party. Do they miss Moss, well, yeah, but give Culpepper some time and he'll make Burleson a star. Funny how the lack of a running game, and Culpepper's recent struggles all coincide with the loss of key members to the offensive line.

I think selling the Vikings short sells the Bengals short in the process. Palmer and the Bengals offense absolutely shined against a very good Vikings defense, and the whole team benefitted from injuries to the Vikings, add to that a rowdy crowd, and the Vikings couldn't handle it.

The Vikings and Daunte Culpepper don't stink, it's just that the Bengals are a good enough team now to take advantage of weaknesses.

I think it really is that simple.

Sea Ray
09-20-2005, 06:38 PM
SaboFan, if you want to me to read what you have to say, you'll have to learn to be more brief. It's not worth my time to read a post as long as yours. This isn't War and Peace yet you decided you needed to write 100plus lines to illustrate your point. I don't care enough about what you have to say to read that much. Obviously you feel very strongly about your Vikings and I'm happy for you. They're not a rival of the Bengals so I wish them well. I disagree on your optimism but who knows. I respect where you're coming from.

Are you sold on Mike Tice? I see him as not being the answer and a new regime coming in which will likely extend this "transition period."

Sabo Fan
09-20-2005, 07:33 PM
SaboFan, if you want to me to read what you have to say, you'll have to learn to be more brief. It's not worth my time to read a post as long as yours. This isn't War and Peace yet you decided you needed to write 100plus lines to illustrate your point. I don't care enough about what you have to say to read that much. Obviously you feel very strongly about your Vikings and I'm happy for you. They're not a rival of the Bengals so I wish them well. I disagree on your optimism but who knows. I respect where you're coming from.

Are you sold on Mike Tice? I see him as not being the answer and a new regime coming in which will likely extend this "transition period."

The reason my post was so long was that it had to be in order to clear up the various misconceptions you seem to have about the Vikings, Bengals, and football in general. If you want me to have shorter explanations, then put some thought and research into the things you write and then I won't have to "write 100-plus lines to illustrate my point."

You don't care about what I have to say enough to read that much, yet I took time to read all of the things you wrote and then reply to them. If you want people to take your views seriously, I suggest you take the time to read opposing viewpoints and learn from them. I won't apologize for being thorough. My guess is that a portion of the way through you came to the conclusion that you may have been off-base with some of the things you said and just decided to stop reading. Your choice really, but I don't need you to tell me that you don't care about what I have to say.


Tell us yes or no and why you think that way. That's what this board is all about...

Interesting that you criticize me for not taking a stance as you perceived it and "copping out," yet you just said you don't have time to read my viewpoints when I do take a stance. So what's the point in me articulating my position? I guess you should take your own advice.

In case you don't decide to read my last post, allow me to hit the high points for you: Daunte Culpepper > Carson Palmer. Your view on the Vikings current state vs. the current state of the Bengals = ignorant and incorrect.

As for Tice, I don't think he's the answer as head coach. As a person, I like the guy and he is a wonderful offensive line coach. However, that doesn't mean he can be a successful head coach. The Vikings can turn this thing around, and my feeling is that if they do, they'll do it with Tice at the helm for the simple reason that I don't think there is anyone out there who is better and can come in at this juncture and make a significant difference. I think Tice is gone at the end of the year regardless of what occurs for the rest of this season and Wilf spends big bucks to get a top head coach. From what I've seen/heard/read about him, he doesn't like to lose and is willing to spend, a stark departure from the former owner, which is the reason Tice is the coach now.

WMR
09-20-2005, 11:50 PM
Well IMO you were. your post was condescending and could have been refuted in a different way. Your point was extremely hypocritical. My point is you made the same mistake and in one instance you were insulting and in another very apologetic. Just stay consistent.

The link between what I posted and what Betterread posted is tenuous at best.

He questioned my honesty and integrity.

I merely restated my position while refuting Sea Ray's post which could have been interpreted either way.

There is no comparison between the two posts which is why my responses were disparate.

Patrick Bateman
09-21-2005, 12:03 AM
The link between what I posted and what Betterread posted is tenuous at best.

He questioned my honesty and integrity.

I merely restated my position while refuting Sea Ray's post which could have been interpreted either way.

There is no comparison between the two posts which is why my responses were disparate.

I read Sea Ray's post and understood it perfectly yet I didn't go off on a rampage since you misinterpreted it. Anyways there is no need to get so worked up over such a small situation. I would suggest that instead of getting excited just re-state your opinion and make it more clear. It cant hurt and is the more personable way to do things.

If you thought he questioned your integrity than maybe for once you should have been the bigger man instead of stooping down to his level and getting all mad.

The point is you also made an honest mistake and I don't anybody was willing to give you heck for it. The only reason why I got involved was because you were extremely hypocritical. People interpret things differently and you have to underdstand that because misinterpretations happen all the time and IMO it's silly to get pissed over it.

WMR
09-21-2005, 12:30 AM
If you thought he questioned your integrity than maybe for once you should have been the bigger man instead of stooping down to his level and getting all mad.

The point is you also made an honest mistake and I don't anybody was willing to give you heck for it.

I was never mad. I'm not going to get mad over a message board. I'm not, however, going to just let it go.

I didn't respond like I did b/c he made a mistake. Lord knows I've made enough of them, as has probably everyone on this board outside of maybe Steel and WoY. LOL.

The mistake was incidental to the way in which he questioned my credibility and honesty.

Regardless, can we please just drop this and move on?

Betterread
09-21-2005, 12:33 AM
Daunte Culpepper was suffering from the same delusions... "Randy doesn't matter" "I can still be just as good a QB w/o Randy" blah blah blah

Maybe he's beginning to come back to reality.

I have no wish to keep going around and around on this topic. But I wanted to make the point to WMR that if you are going to quote someone, get it right. I have suffered from being personally misquoted in the media and having to cover for clients that were misquoted, and its very stressful and emotionally draining. You know what the reporter said when I confronted him the last time it happened, "Geez, when I listen to my recording again, you said something similiar but not exactly what I wrote". Did he file a retraction. No.
So, when WMR attributed words to Daunte Culpepper that did not sound right to me, I questioned him about it. He got defensive, but never a) provided a source for the quote; or b) said "I may have mis-quoted or incorrectly attributed words to him". This is far too common in today's world. It's as if you didn't intend to misquote someone, it's OK if you made a mistake. In my opinion, that relates to personal integrity. You can say that's an overreaction, but if you ever had the pleasure of being misquoted, you may be able to see my point of view.

WMR
09-21-2005, 12:38 AM
I have no wish to keep going around and around on this topic. But I wanted to make the point to WMR that if you are going to quote someone, get it right. I have suffered from being personally misquoted in the media and having to cover for clients that were misquoted, and its very stressful and emotionally draining. You know what the reporter said when I confronted him the last time it happened, "Geez, when I listen to my recording again, you said something similiar but not exactly what I wrote". Did he file a retraction. No.
So, when WMR attributed words to Daunte Culpepper that did not sound right to me, I questioned him about it. He got defensive, but never a) provided a source for the quote; or b) said "I may have mis-quoted or incorrectly attributed words to him". This is far too common in today's world. It's as if you didn't intend to misquote someone, it's OK if you made a mistake.

I'm sorry I didn't use the proper ALWD citation form. I heard him say words which, if not verbatim, amounted to exactly what I said. The source was either a press conference or interview w/ Daunte Culpepper that was played on ESPN Radio. I thought I said that in a previous post?

Steve4192
09-21-2005, 12:43 AM
Good Grief.

Why don't you guys just whip you johnsons out, measure 'em, and end this pissing match already.

Betterread
09-21-2005, 12:47 AM
WMR, I'm not getting my point across. I think you mis-heard, and therefore are mis-quoting Daunte. I think that because I have not heard him say the kind of things you are saying that he said.
So, you style yourself as a direct, straightforward kind of guy. Then, provide the quote. If it was on ESPN, they will have a link. If it was on a radio interview, they will have the interview. Please provide the links you have mentioned.
If you can't provide them, as a person of integrity, it should be easy for you to say that you might have mis-heard or mis-interpreted what you initially claimed. It's not a big deal. If you find it difficult to admit that you are human and might have attributed something incorrectly (something everyone does occasionally), then that tells me something about you.

WMR
09-21-2005, 12:48 AM
Good Grief.

Why don't you guys just whip you johnsons out, measure 'em, and end this pissing match already.

http://www.burleehost.com/comerford/personal/pics/fish0602/this_big.jpg

WMR
09-21-2005, 12:49 AM
WMR, I'm not getting my point across. I think you mis-heard, and therefore are mis-quoting Daunte. I think that because I have not heard him say the kind of things you are saying that he said.
So, you style yourself as a direct, straightforward kind of guy. Then, provide the quote. If it was on ESPN, they will have a link. If it was on a radio interview, they will have the interview. Please provide the links you have mentioned.
If you can't provide them, as a person of integrity, it should be easy for you to say that you might have mis-heard or mis-interpreted what you initially claimed. It's not a big deal. If you find it difficult to admit that you are human and might have attributed something incorrectly (something everyone does occasionally), then that tells me something about you.

I'll see if I can find it.

Yachtzee
09-21-2005, 01:23 AM
I'm sorry I didn't use the proper ALWD citation form.

Sorry, here at Redszone, we only use Bluebook. ;) (A little law student humor)

WMR
09-21-2005, 01:30 AM
Sorry, here at Redszone, we only use Bluebook. ;) (A little law student humor)

:laugh: ;)

CTA513
09-21-2005, 01:54 PM
Good Grief.

Why don't you guys just whip you johnsons out, measure 'em, and end this pissing match already.

We all know someone will end up cheating.

OldRightHander
09-22-2005, 11:02 AM
This has been an entertaining thread. I don't read much on the non baseball part and rarely post over here, but I guess I'll jump in here for a wee bit. As far as the whole QB debate, I'd take any relatively talented QB if I have a good O line, a decent running game, and a good defense. That combination will win you more games than you will lose. I think a mediocre QB with a good supporting cast will do as well or better than a good QB who spends half the game running for his life. Culpepper is far better than what we've seen from him the last two games. Palmer would have done the same on that team if he's on his back half the time and running around like a headless chicken the other half. Anyone good enough to be a starting QB in the NFL will do well if he has enough protection. Carson has been getting the protection lately and he's had time to make the plays. He had a lot of time to make the throw on that first TD to Chad. Was Culpepper getting that kind of time? Not too often. To me it seems very similar to having a good lineup with no starting pitching. Where have we seen that before?

Sea Ray
09-22-2005, 03:05 PM
As far as the whole QB debate, I'd take any relatively talented QB if I have a good O line, a decent running game, and a good defense. That combination will win you more games than you will lose. I think a mediocre QB with a good supporting cast will do as well or better than a good QB who spends half the game running for his life. Culpepper is far better than what we've seen from him the last two games. Palmer would have done the same on that team if he's on his back half the time and running around like a headless chicken the other half. Anyone good enough to be a starting QB in the NFL will do well if he has enough protection.

No question about it, the entire Minnesota Vikings team is going through a tough time right now and I don't think anyone said that Culpepper is not a good QB. Their weak division will give them a chance to recover this year and the Bengals will try to help them by knocking off Chicago this weekend. If the Bears win this weekend then they'll be on their way and have to be considered the team to beat.

Patrick Bateman
09-22-2005, 03:15 PM
No question about it, the entire Minnesota Vikings team is going through a tough time right now and I don't think anyone said that Culpepper is not a good QB. Their weak division will give them a chance to recover this year and the Bengals will try to help them by knocking off Chicago this weekend. If the Bears win this weekend then they'll be on their way and have to be considered the team to beat.

You are exactly right. I would be very surprised if Daunte had a bad game this week. I look for him to rebound and for the Vikes to make a run for the division. After all he has been arguably the 2nd best QB the last 2 years so I don't put a lot of thought into the last 2 games even though he was obviously awful.

Steve4192
09-24-2005, 12:30 AM
I would be very surprised if Daunte had a bad game this week. I look for him to rebound and for the Vikes to make a run for the division.
I remember a whole bunch of folks (myself included) saying the same thing after his week one debacle. Honestly, in all my years of watching the NFL, I have never seen a QB look worse than Daunte did against the Bengals. Not Akili Smith, not David Klingler, not even Ryan Leaf. I still think he can get it back together, but I'm not nearly as confident in him now as I was two weeks ago.

WMR
10-13-2005, 01:27 AM
WMR, I'm not getting my point across. I think you mis-heard, and therefore are mis-quoting Daunte. I think that because I have not heard him say the kind of things you are saying that he said.
So, you style yourself as a direct, straightforward kind of guy. Then, provide the quote. If it was on ESPN, they will have a link. If it was on a radio interview, they will have the interview. Please provide the links you have mentioned.
If you can't provide them, as a person of integrity, it should be easy for you to say that you might have mis-heard or mis-interpreted what you initially claimed. It's not a big deal. If you find it difficult to admit that you are human and might have attributed something incorrectly (something everyone does occasionally), then that tells me something about you.

Hey Betterread, you get HBO? Make sure to check out this week's edition of Inside The NFL. If the Vikings weren't whining about losing Randy Moss before, they sure are now! :laugh:

kheidg-
10-15-2005, 04:41 AM
Hey Betterread, you get HBO? Make sure to check out this week's edition of Inside The NFL. If the Vikings weren't whining about losing Randy Moss before, they sure are now! :laugh:

I live in Minnesota and don't hear nothing of what you say.

You can laugh all you want (I'm not much of a Vikes fan either) but, whatever point you are trying to prove by gloating after you basically conceded in previous posts makes no sense.

If I don't hear anything about what you are saying there is not much vailidity to it. IMO Culpepper is not a good QB to have heading your team, but that is just another reason why I'm not a vikes fan. But, he is not one of the worst QBs in the league. Look what he has done in the past seasons, and even without Moss his numbers aren't much different.

If Moss is such a big deal why are his Raiders at 1-3 with a superior (in your mind) Collins at QB? Moss took plays off, was a constant headcase, WOULDN'T block, and never made a big catch across the middle in his life. He is a great "catch and run" receiver but is not what I look for in the prototypical go to guy.

A friend I graduated HS with played football for the Vikings last year and was at Moss' house several times. Culpepper was never there and as far as I know they were never friends. The only people that miss him are the folks as KARE 11 TV that like to get his reaction to meaningless things.

WMR
10-15-2005, 05:04 AM
I live in Minnesota and don't hear nothing of what you say.

You can laugh all you want (I'm not much of a Vikes fan either) but, whatever point you are trying to prove by gloating after you basically conceded in previous posts makes no sense.

If I don't hear anything about what you are saying there is not much vailidity to it. IMO Culpepper is not a good QB to have heading your team, but that is just another reason why I'm not a vikes fan. But, he is not one of the worst QBs in the league. Look what he has done in the past seasons, and even without Moss his numbers aren't much different.

If Moss is such a big deal why are his Raiders at 1-3 with a superior (in your mind) Collins at QB? Moss took plays off, was a constant headcase, WOULDN'T block, and never made a big catch across the middle in his life. He is a great "catch and run" receiver but is not what I look for in the prototypical go to guy.

A friend I graduated HS with played football for the Vikings last year and was at Moss' house several times. Culpepper was never there and as far as I know they were never friends. The only people that miss him are the folks as KARE 11 TV that like to get his reaction to meaningless things.


Well, if you don't hear anything of what I was talking about then you must not watch Inside the NFL. Cris Carter, former Viking, went to Viking-camp and interviewed a number of their veterans to ask them what is going on. He asked them about Randy Moss. Every single one of them said that they should not have traded Randy; that you can't just expect to replace the best player in the league BLAH BLAH BLAH Basically the exact same stuff that I said throughout this thread.

I'm laughing because it's funny. If you aren't hearing what I'm talking about, well, I can explain why that is happening for you in very simple terms: You do not have HBO. To rectify this situation, you may either goto HBO.com or call your cable or satellite subscriber and tell them, "I want HBO!"

If that isn't a possibility then just consult the website for show re-air times and head down to your local sportsbar. I'm sure they'll let you watch it. You might have to order an appetizer or something, but they're usually pretty cool about that.

Ummm, no. Daunte is way better than Kerry Collins. Daunte knew where his bread was buttered. If Randy were getting the ball w/ the consistency that he was while w/ the Vikings I guarantee you Raiders are at least at .500 and probably above .500. The way they are using Randy Moss in Oakland should be considered criminal. He's near the top in yardage, but in all honestly, he should have ALOT more than that. Collins has just got to wake up.

Well, KARE 11 asked about his TD celebrations... sort of hard to celebrate about TDs when you aren't scoring any w/ any regularity.

Oh well:

Vikings: Beat the Bears

No more Boob/Booze Cruises till you go over .500; after that, Smoot and Tice will split the bill!!


HEEEEEYA

kheidg-
10-16-2005, 04:17 AM
Well, if you don't hear anything of what I was talking about then you must not watch Inside the NFL. Cris Carter, former Viking, went to Viking-camp and interviewed a number of their veterans to ask them what is going on. He asked them about Randy Moss. Every single one of them said that they should not have traded Randy; that you can't just expect to replace the best player in the league BLAH BLAH BLAH Basically the exact same stuff that I said throughout this thread.

I'm laughing because it's funny. If you aren't hearing what I'm talking about, well, I can explain why that is happening for you in very simple terms: You do not have HBO. To rectify this situation, you may either goto HBO.com or call your cable or satellite subscriber and tell them, "I want HBO!"

If that isn't a possibility then just consult the website for show re-air times and head down to your local sportsbar. I'm sure they'll let you watch it. You might have to order an appetizer or something, but they're usually pretty cool about that.

Ummm, no. Daunte is way better than Kerry Collins. Daunte knew where his bread was buttered. If Randy were getting the ball w/ the consistency that he was while w/ the Vikings I guarantee you Raiders are at least at .500 and probably above .500. The way they are using Randy Moss in Oakland should be considered criminal. He's near the top in yardage, but in all honestly, he should have ALOT more than that. Collins has just got to wake up.

Well, KARE 11 asked about his TD celebrations... sort of hard to celebrate about TDs when you aren't scoring any w/ any regularity.

Oh well:

Vikings: Beat the Bears

No more Boob/Booze Cruises till you go over .500; after that, Smoot and Tice will split the bill!!


HEEEEEYA


Entertaining post WilyMo. Good prediction on the game tomorrow, I'm thinking the same as you.

It's not that I don't get HBO. I don't really watch HBO. I like Bob Costas, but Cris Carter is nothing but self centered. Go do a some cocaine #80. Him and Moss were never friends to begin with. Randy was detrimental in the decline of CC, and CC whined and whined about it (not getting as many looks).

Even though I haven't seen the episode of Inisde the NFL or whatever on HBO, I'd love to hear what players CC interviewed.

Sea Ray
03-14-2006, 03:42 PM
Do you doubt that the Bengals would trade Carson Palmer for Daunte in a minute if it was offered?


Well now we know Daunte's value and it isn't even a first rd pick. The Dolphins set his value at a 2nd rd pick. We've also seen how much money the Bengals think Carson Palmer is worth. So yeah, no way would the Bengals trade Palmer for Culpepper. Heck the Bengals could have traded a 2nd rd pick for him like the Dolphins did.

It's ludicrous to even infer that Culpepper has a value in the ballpark as Carson Palmer

Steve4192
03-14-2006, 03:55 PM
To be fair, Betterread wrote that in September, when Culpepper's implosion and Carson's ascension to stardom could have both been the product of a small sample size. Culpepper had a ton of performance data that would support the belief that his slow start was an anomoly, and Carson's performance was WAY beyond anyones wildest expectations. You must have been seriously PO'd at Betterread to dredge up an outdated six-month old post to try and make him look foolish.

Sea Ray
03-14-2006, 06:00 PM
To be fair, Betterread wrote that in September, when Culpepper's implosion and Carson's ascension to stardom could have both been the product of a small sample size. Culpepper had a ton of performance data that would support the belief that his slow start was an anomoly, and Carson's performance was WAY beyond anyones wildest expectations. You must have been seriously PO'd at Betterread to dredge up an outdated six-month old post to try and make him look foolish.

Hindsight is the clearest, most accurate way to look at these sorts of things. This thread was all about the issues you stated above. How good is Culpepper? How good is Carson? We can argue back and forth all we want but until their value is set like a new contract or a trade then we really don't know.

Now we know their value and time has proven those that argued Carson is the better QB to be correct. I like using facts and a trade for a second rd pick is much more factual than yelling "you're wrong. Carson is better".


It's not personal for me. There were quite a few who took the side Betterread did. I just used his post to illustrate the lunacy of those who spent page after page arguing that Culpepper was the better QB who just happened to have a bad game.

There's no such thing as an outdated post unless these players retire.

Patrick Bateman
03-14-2006, 06:08 PM
Hindsight is the clearest, most accurate way to look at these sorts of things. This thread was all about the issues you stated above. How good is Culpepper? How good is Carson? We can argue back and forth all we want but until their value is set like a new contract or a trade then we really don't know.

Now we know their value and time has proven those that argued Carson is the better QB to be correct. I like using facts and a trade for a second rd pick is much more factual than yelling "you're wrong. Carson is better".


It's not personal for me. There were quite a few who took the side Betterread did. I just used his post to illustrate the lunacy of those who spent page after page arguing that Culpepper was the better QB who just happened to have a bad game.

There's no such thing as an outdated post unless these players retire.

But when Betteread wrote that he had a very plausible argument. Culpepper was sruggling, but was also coming off a MVP calibre year. Palmer was looking good, but was still a bit of an unknown.

It's pretty easy telling someone they are wrong after all of the facts come out. When BR wrote his comment Culpepper would not have been traded for a 2nd round pick, his value had to drop considerably based on a bad year and turmoil in the franchise. Palmer would not have recieved the contract he did 5 games into the season.

Now I never agreed with BR and still don't, but his argument was very reasonable at the time. If he made the argument right now, he would be dead wrong. Hindsight may be 20-20, but it is also unfair in many circumstances. It may have proved you right this time, but it doesn't make BR's argument any less rationale.

WMR
03-14-2006, 06:13 PM
But when Betteread wrote that he had a very plausible argument. Culpepper was sruggling, but was also coming off a MVP calibre year. Palmer was looking good, but was still a bit of an unknown.

It's pretty easy telling someone they are wrong after all of the facts come out. When BR wrote his comment Culpepper would not have been traded for a 2nd round pick, his value had to drop considerably based on a bad year and turmoil in the franchise. Palmer would not have recieved the contract he did 5 games into the season.

Now I never agreed with BR and still don't, but his argument was very reasonable at the time. If he made the argument right now, he would be dead wrong. Hindsight may be 20-20, but it is also unfair in many circumstances. It may have proved you right this time, but it doesn't make BR's argument any less rationale.

As true as all that is, it doesn't change the bigger truth.

(and I'm one who believes that Daunte has some good football ahead of him... just not Carson Palmer-level football... as I said many months ago)

Sea Ray
03-14-2006, 06:16 PM
When BR wrote his comment Culpepper would not have been traded for a 2nd round pick, his value had to drop considerably based on a bad year and turmoil in the franchise. Palmer would not have recieved the contract he did 5 games into the season.

Now I never agreed with BR and still don't, but his argument was very reasonable at the time. If he made the argument right now, he would be dead wrong. Hindsight may be 20-20, but it is also unfair in many circumstances. It may have proved you right this time, but it doesn't make BR's argument any less rationale.

I totally disagree. I felt Culpepper looked like a washed up has been at the time and that Carson Palmer looked like a franchise QB. Maybe I can see the future a little better than some.;)

WMR
03-14-2006, 06:17 PM
I totally disagree. I felt Culpepper looked like a washed up has been at the time and that Carson Palmer looked like a franchise QB. Maybe I can see the future a little better than some.;)

:beerme:

Patrick Bateman
03-14-2006, 06:28 PM
I totally disagree. I felt Culpepper looked like a washed up has been at the time and that Carson Palmer looked like a franchise QB. Maybe I can see the future a little better than some.;)

I never agreed with Br, I'm just saying that there are some makeable arguments that Culpepper was the better QB.

I still think Dante has some good years left in him, but at the time I would not have traded Palmer for him and I definitelt would not now. He is far superior.

I was just trying to defend BR because IMO, it's unfair to drag a post back from a season ago to determine whether he was right at the time.

Anyways we all know now that Palmer is the man and that is all that really matters.

Sea Ray
03-14-2006, 06:41 PM
I never agreed with Br, I'm just saying that there are some makeable arguments that Culpepper was the better QB.

I still think Dante has some good years left in him, but at the time I would not have traded Palmer for him and I definitelt would not now. He is far superior.

I was just trying to defend BR because IMO, it's unfair to drag a post back from a season ago to determine whether he was right at the time.

Anyways we all know now that Palmer is the man and that is all that really matters.

Anything we write on the internet for all the world to see, we are accountable for. If Culpepper leads the Dolphins to the Super Bowl and someone wants to remind folks what was written here, that's fair game in my book.

Patrick Bateman
03-14-2006, 06:49 PM
Anything we write on the internet for all the world to see, we are accountable for. If Culpepper leads the Dolphins to the Super Bowl and someone wants to remind folks what was written here, that's fair game in my book.

That's totally different from your original post of:

"Well now we know Daunte's value and it isn't even a first rd pick. The Dolphins set his value at a 2nd rd pick. We've also seen how much money the Bengals think Carson Palmer is worth".

When BR's post was made this post was inaccurate. The Vikings would not have dealt Dante for a 2nd round pick and the Bengals would not have given Palmer the big contract. IT took a very, very good year from Palmer and a god awful year from Dante to make it all happen.

I would agree that BR was wrong on his conception that Dante had more value than Palmer, but the current value of worth for the 2 is not the same as it was then.

Sea Ray
03-14-2006, 07:21 PM
That's totally different from your original post of:

"Well now we know Daunte's value and it isn't even a first rd pick. The Dolphins set his value at a 2nd rd pick. We've also seen how much money the Bengals think Carson Palmer is worth".

When BR's post was made this post was inaccurate. The Vikings would not have dealt Dante for a 2nd round pick and the Bengals would not have given Palmer the big contract. IT took a very, very good year from Palmer and a god awful year from Dante to make it all happen.

I would agree that BR was wrong on his conception that Dante had more value than Palmer, but the current value of worth for the 2 is not the same as it was then.

I disagree that you or I know what the Vikings would have traded Daunte for. Now we do know. Hence the addition of new facts. I also think the Bengals were planning on giving Carson the extention for some time. You don't just wake up one day and come up with that kind of money. That takes a lot of planning and budgeting on the Bengal's part. They also had to work out the cap implications. I think the Bengals were indeed planning Carson's big contract as far back as the 5th week.

Patrick Bateman
03-14-2006, 07:28 PM
I disagree that you or I know what the Vikings would have traded Daunte for. Now we do know. Hence the addition of new facts. I also think the Bengals were planning on giving Carson the extention for some time. You don't just wake up one day and come up with that kind of money. That takes a lot of planning and budgeting on the Bengal's part. They also had to work out the cap implications. I think the Bengals were indeed planning Carson's big contract as far back as the 5th week.

So what you are saying is that if Dante won the MVP then his trade value would still be a 2nd round pick, or if Palmer played like Rob Johnson for the rest of the year the Bengals would have spent the dough they did on Palmer? I do agree that it looked like the Bengals were waiting to give Palmer the big contract, but they waited him to earn it instead of basing everything on his future play. Because he had such a good season they gave him the contract.

Just because the Vikings traded him for a 2nd round pick today gives absolutely no indication of what they would have dealt him for at the beginning of the year. It was a completely different situation and Dante was a completely different QB. We do not know what the Vikings were willing to trade Dante for based on this trade, but we do know that it would have been more than what he was dealt for today. The reason is simple. Dante's value went down as the season wore on. At the begiining of the season he was a MVP contender, while at the end a slug.

Sabo Fan
03-14-2006, 08:13 PM
Well now we know Daunte's value and it isn't even a first rd pick. The Dolphins set his value at a 2nd rd pick. We've also seen how much money the Bengals think Carson Palmer is worth. So yeah, no way would the Bengals trade Palmer for Culpepper. Heck the Bengals could have traded a 2nd rd pick for him like the Dolphins did.

It's ludicrous to even infer that Culpepper has a value in the ballpark as Carson Palmer

You know, I was willing to forget all the asinine things you said on this thread previously before you decided to dredge this up and essentially try to use the Culpepper trade as a way to prove the moronic conceptions you seem to have about him and the Vikings in general. If you want to intelligently discuss this trade and its implications, that's fine, but using this thread in an attempt to pat yourself on the back is childish. In no previous post on this thread do I recall you mentioning that you thought Culpepper would sustain an injury, publicly demand a trade and be dealt at his lowest possible value. Had you done that then I could see the point in your post. Interesting how no Viking fan chose to dig this thing up when Palmer's season was ended and there was talk of it being a potentially career-ending injury.

Anyway, once again you prove your relative lack of football knowledge, or perhaps just your refusal to look at all factors. If you had looked at the big picture instead of spouting off you would see that there is absolutely no way that this trade is an accurate representation of Culpepper's value. The guy sustained a serious injury, much like Palmer did. Add in the fact that Daunte publicly demanded a trade out of Minnesota and his transgressions involving Lake Minnetonka and there was no way that the Vikings could have hoped to get equal value. Look at the Terrell Owens situation. Did you see what the Eagles got for him? Quite a haul, don't you think? Personally, I'm surprised they got a second round pick for Culpepper considering the situation.

We've seen how much the Bengals think Palmer is worth, have we? Perhaps, though I think you'd see a much different picture had he sustained his injury pre-contract. Think they'd be willing to give him that kind of jack afterwards? Thought so. What do you think the Bengals could get for Palmer now? More than Culpepper? Actually, I'll pre-emptively agree with you and say that they would (age is really the only factor in that difference though, and it's not fair to de-value Culpepper there, after all it's not his fault when he was born), though probably not as much as you think, for the simple reason that he's injured, much like Culpepper.

Let's look to the future here a bit and go all hypothetical. You seem so sure of Palmer's ability so tell me what his value would be if four or so years from now a 28 or 29 year-old Carson Palmer has no Chad Johnson to throw to, no Rudi Johnson to hand off to and no Willie Anderson to block for him, tears his MCL, PCL and ACL in a game, and then demands a trade out of Cincinnati following the season. Think he'd warrant a second round pick? I'll say Palmer has about the same chance of netting a second rounder in return as Culpepper did.

WVRed
03-14-2006, 08:44 PM
I'm a Bengals fan, but if Palmer struggles or suffers a career altering injury, I hope some people can take it as well as they dish it out.

I guess Daunte can party now in the Atlantic Ocean instead of Lake Minnesota. I don't think he will ever return to form, between the injury and the lack of Randy Moss. Then again, maybe Chris Chambers will step it up.

Sea Ray
03-15-2006, 12:40 AM
So what you are saying is that if Dante won the MVP then his trade value would still be a 2nd round pick, or if Palmer played like Rob Johnson for the rest of the year the Bengals would have spent the dough they did on Palmer? I do agree that it looked like the Bengals were waiting to give Palmer the big contract, but they waited him to earn it instead of basing everything on his future play. Because he had such a good season they gave him the contract.

Just because the Vikings traded him for a 2nd round pick today gives absolutely no indication of what they would have dealt him for at the beginning of the year. It was a completely different situation and Dante was a completely different QB. We do not know what the Vikings were willing to trade Dante for based on this trade, but we do know that it would have been more than what he was dealt for today. The reason is simple. Dante's value went down as the season wore on. At the begiining of the season he was a MVP contender, while at the end a slug.


The issue is how good is Culpepper? As of the 5th game of the year some folks were saying he was one of the best in the league. I argued, no he was one of the best but he's not any longer. Now we see they had a hard time finding any team to even take him. It tells me that the league agrees with me and they saw the same things I saw when I made those comments in October.

Sea Ray
03-15-2006, 12:51 AM
Let's look to the future here a bit and go all hypothetical. You seem so sure of Palmer's ability so tell me what his value would be if four or so years from now a 28 or 29 year-old Carson Palmer has no Chad Johnson to throw to, no Rudi Johnson to hand off to and no Willie Anderson to block for him, tears his MCL, PCL and ACL in a game, and then demands a trade out of Cincinnati following the season. Think he'd warrant a second round pick? I'll say Palmer has about the same chance of netting a second rounder in return as Culpepper did.

Fair enough. Let's play your hypothetical. If four years from now your scenario takes place, I will not argue that Carson Palmer is still great. I will say he's a has been and I appreciate his past work. I said similar things in the early 90s regarding Boomer Esiason and I was glad they drafted his replacement, Klingler although unfortunately they had no idea how to groom a young QB.

The average NFL career is just over 3 years. Your day in the sun is short and I realize this. I'm not saying that Palmer will have a better career than Culpepper. I don't know. I am saying that as of 2005 Palmer is a better QB than Culpepper and that's when some idiots, who know as much football as Matt Millen, argued that Carson Palmer wasn't worth Culpepper one for one in a trade. Well now we know what Culpepper is worth and yes I agree with you, I was surprised they even got a 2nd rd pick for him.

Patrick Bateman
03-15-2006, 12:53 AM
The issue is how good is Culpepper? As of the 5th game of the year some folks were saying he was one of the best in the league. I argued, no he was one of the best but he's not any longer. Now we see they had a hard time finding any team to even take him. It tells me that the league agrees with me and they saw the same things I saw when I made those comments in October.

No it doesn't. The league does not agree with you. Things have changed since October. His value has actually decreased because of many factors (ie. continued poor play, injuries, and demanding of the trade).

I know you don't agree with me, but his value has changed dramatically. After the 5 games or whatever, I am willing to bet that many teams would have been willing to give him an opprtunity to improve, but after the difficulties he had after a full season his value decreased dramaticallly from before, since his chances of reverting back to career norms had decreased dramatically.

Sea Ray
03-15-2006, 12:57 AM
No it doesn't. The league does not agree with you. Things have changed since October. His value has actually decreased because of many factors (ie. continued poor play, injuries, and demanding of the trade).

I know you don't agree with me, but his value has changed dramatically. After the 5 games or whatever, I am willing to bet that many teams would have been willing to give him an opprtunity to improve, but after the difficulties he had after a full season his value decreased dramaticallly from before, since his chances of reverting back to career norms had decreased dramatically.

If you are correct then the rest of the league was slow to come around to my way of thinking. I don't think I'm that much smarter or more forward thinking than the rest of the league but maybe you are right...;)

Sabo Fan
03-15-2006, 08:45 PM
The issue is how good is Culpepper? As of the 5th game of the year some folks were saying he was one of the best in the league. I argued, no he was one of the best but he's not any longer. Now we see they had a hard time finding any team to even take him. It tells me that the league agrees with me and they saw the same things I saw when I made those comments in October.

You are still somehow managing to miss the point completely. The league agrees with you, do they? Well good to know, I guess now we can just go straight to you for all our football questions and you'll no doubt have the answers months ahead of time. Injuries, trades, team sales, play-calling, you've got it all figured out I'm sure. It's amazing, your arguments get flat-out shot down with actual facts, yet you still find a way to pat yourself on the back. That's a championship-caliber ego you have there.

Why did the Vikings have a hard time finding a suitor for Culpepper? You claim it's because of the things you saw in October: lack of accuracy, supposed struggles due to the loss of Moss, poor decision-making, etc. Surely the lack of interest in him had nothing to do with the fact that he ripped apart his entire knee, engaged in some questionable off the field behavior (though all he really did was receive a lap-dance, which to my knowledge isn't illegal, but that's another issue) and had a rash of what can only be described as mystifying behavior after the seaon ended (agent firing, representing himself, trade demand, etc.). Undoubtedly it was all about the things you saw in that Bengals-Vikings game in October. I wish you would have said something about seeing that injury ahead of time, maybe he could have been warned.

I mean really, no team in it's right mind would look at his previous performance and say that the guy just had a bad couple games, woud they? 2004 was surely just an abberation, just like all his other stellar seasons. No doubt the Daunte Culpepper that we saw in the first five or six games of the season was the true Daunte Culpepper (we'll just throw out the games he played well in last season though, like New Orleans and Green Bay, (and I'd argue that the opener against Tampa Bay wasn't all that bad, he just got some unlucky bounces and was forced into a corner) because obviously those were completely out of character for him).

I'm curious to know if you saw this so-called "drop-off" in Culpepper's performance coming prior to the start of the 2005 season. What were your thoughts on him after last season? I'm sure that since you have this amazing ability to see into the future you no doubt were right on top of the situation and saw this poor year coming as soon as the Vikings ended their 2004 season in Philadelphia. You were probably undaunted in your skepticism after seeing his 41 touchdown season, as well as scoffing at that 70% completion percentage and knowing that he would implode and was finished as a quarterback.


Fair enough. Let's play your hypothetical. If four years from now your scenario takes place, I will not argue that Carson Palmer is still great. I will say he's a has been and I appreciate his past work. I said similar things in the early 90s regarding Boomer Esiason and I was glad they drafted his replacement, Klingler although unfortunately they had no idea how to groom a young QB.

Man, you're harsh. 28 year-old QB's with a history of Pro-Bowl caliber performances don't just completely fall off the face of the planet ability-wise over the course of a few months, or at least one doesn't jump to mind. Sure football players have a short shelf life, but without looking at any data, I would guess that the typical age for significant drop off would be in the 32-34 age range. Sure there is a certain level of attrition once a player reaches 30, but they're usually able to perform at a pretty high level after that. You seem to want to give up on guys at the drop of a hat

The point I was making was that Palmer may have to deal with circumstances that are beyond his control at some point in his career and I was curious to see if you would be ready to drop him as quickly as you claim you would have dropped Culpepper. Sounds like you would, so therefore I think your problem lies not in how you evaluate Carson Palmer, but how you evaluate players (maybe it's just quarterbacks) in general. I for one would jump at the chance to aquire a guy of Palmer's or Culpepper's ilk for a discounted price, injuries and a poor 1/3 of a season be damned. I think the Dolphins got one heck of a quarterback for probably about three more seasons (assuming the rehab proceeds normally) and I woud say the same thing about Palmer were he in a similar situation.

Oh, and as a fun sidenote, there was no amount of coaching, player development, or act of God that would have made David Klingler an acceptable replacement for any QB, let alone Boomer Esiason. The guy had no business being thought of as a future franchise quarterback. He and Tim Couch are pretty much the same guy, both from the stats-friendly, value-boosting run-and-shoot offense at schools in which they went up against less than stellar competition. I don't care how many football people liked the guy, it was obvious to me that Klingler and Couch were both unworthy of the expectations that were heaped upon them. Sure the Bengals were poor at player development in those days, but a guy has to have a certain skill level to even bother with, and as far as franchise QB's go, Klingler wasn't.

MWM
03-15-2006, 09:07 PM
Plenty of people could see clear in September that Carson Palmer was a better QB than Daunte ever was. It's not hindsight. I wouldn't have trade Palmer for Daunte straight-up before the season (regardless of money) and I certainly wouldn't do it now. If both fully recover from their injuries, Palmer will be a superior QB to Daunte in every way. He's just better. Carson (assuming health) is THAT good.

Patrick Bateman
03-16-2006, 01:34 AM
Plenty of people could see clear in September that Carson Palmer was a better QB than Daunte ever was. It's not hindsight. I wouldn't have trade Palmer for Daunte straight-up before the season (regardless of money) and I certainly wouldn't do it now. If both fully recover from their injuries, Palmer will be a superior QB to Daunte in every way. He's just better. Carson (assuming health) is THAT good.

I don't think Sabo Fan and I are really denying that, but still Culpepper's value has declined considerably since his 5 game slump in September since everything continued to go wrong for the guy. It went from a slump to his new norm.

Simply put, the trade that just went down does not give a true reflection of his value at the time the comments were made.

Sea Ray
03-16-2006, 02:24 PM
I don't think Sabo Fan and I are really denying that, but still Culpepper's value has declined considerably since his 5 game slump in September since everything continued to go wrong for the guy. It went from a slump to his new norm.

Simply put, the trade that just went down does not give a true reflection of his value at the time the comments were made.

Folks in October were denying that. The issue which was argued at the time was "would you trade Culpepper for Palmer?" I pasted comments earlier in this thread. If you and SaboFan say that Culpepper is not worth Carson Palmer then we don't have any issues.

Sea Ray
03-16-2006, 02:30 PM
I'm curious to know if you saw this so-called "drop-off" in Culpepper's performance coming prior to the start of the 2005 season. What were your thoughts on him after last season? I'm sure that since you have this amazing ability to see into the future you no doubt were right on top of the situation and saw this poor year coming as soon as the Vikings ended their 2004 season in Philadelphia. You were probably undaunted in your skepticism after seeing his 41 touchdown season, as well as scoffing at that 70% completion percentage and knowing that he would implode and was finished as a quarterback.

I made my evaluation after the Bengals/Vikings game and the games leading up to the Bengals game. I did not think he was that bad as of say July 2005. He was playing horribly in 2005 and in fact after he got hurt the offense performed better with his backup in there...not great for his resume.
So no I did not see the dropoff until I saw him play in 2005.

Patrick Bateman
03-16-2006, 03:22 PM
Folks in October were denying that. The issue which was argued at the time was "would you trade Culpepper for Palmer?" I pasted comments earlier in this thread. If you and SaboFan say that Culpepper is not worth Carson Palmer then we don't have any issues.

Culpepper was not and still is not worth Palmer. We can both agree on that 100%.

My only argument is that Culpepper's value was more than a 2nd round pick at the beginning of the year, thus the trade that went down is not really a great indicator of his value at the time of the debate.

Sea Ray
03-16-2006, 04:20 PM
Culpepper was not and still is not worth Palmer. We can both agree on that 100%.

My only argument is that Culpepper's value was more than a 2nd round pick at the beginning of the year, thus the trade that went down is not really a great indicator of his value at the time of the debate.

The debate didn't take place at the beginning of the year. It took place 5 games into it after he looked horrible.

But you and I have no disagreement. I agree with everything you wrote above. It just amazed me the folks who thought Culpepper had more value than Palmer as of mid October 2005.

Sabo Fan
03-16-2006, 08:15 PM
I made my evaluation after the Bengals/Vikings game and the games leading up to the Bengals game. I did not think he was that bad as of say July 2005. He was playing horribly in 2005 and in fact after he got hurt the offense performed better with his backup in there...not great for his resume.
So no I did not see the dropoff until I saw him play in 2005.

So based on two games at the begining of the season, you were able to write off the rest of the guy's career? The games leading up to the Bengals game? Try one game, the opener against Tampa Bay. Did you actually watch that game, or did you just see the interception he threw in the last minute and assume he had a bad game? I watched that game from start to finish and can tell you that it was not that bad, but unfortunately the referees overruled two touchdown passes on two bogus calls and one of the interceptions was a tipped pass that should have been caught by a wide receiver. Sure he was looking downfield too much, but there isn't anything that would lead me to believe that wasn't the game plan going in. Not to mention the offensive line play was less than stellar.

The team performed better after his injury and that's an endictment of Culpepper's performance. Tell you what, there is no quarterback who could have done much better in those first five games in the same situation. And of those five games actually played well in two, but no one wants to talk about that. The fact of the matter is that by the time Johnson took over the offensive line had solidified again and the defense was much better so they didn't have to play catch up constantly and Johnson did a good job of managing games. That's not a knock against Culpepper, it's just a simple matter of evaluating the circumstances.


Plenty of people could see clear in September that Carson Palmer was a better QB than Daunte ever was. It's not hindsight. I wouldn't have traded Palmer for Daunte straight-up before the season (regardless of money) and I certainly wouldn't do it now. If both fully recover from their injuries, Palmer will be a superior QB to Daunte in every way. He's just better. Carson (assuming health) is THAT good.

And on what would you base that Palmer was clearly the better QB based on past performance? Superior in every way? Very doubtful, unless Palmer bulks up and starts shrugging off blitzing linebackers. I really can't understand how some people can say that Palmer was the far superior quarterback when looking at their 2004 seasons. Culpepper had a historic year and was entering his prime at the age of 28. Palmer had just completed his first year of starting and had a pretty solid year, but nothing earth shattering. His 2005 season certainly showed great progress, but I wonder if there is another level to his play or if he's peaked. Obviously that's a good peak, but do we put him up there with the Elways, Youngs, Marinos, etc? Most here seem to think so based on their comments, but I think I'll let you all attend the crowning ceremony and catch up later.

Look, I think Carson Palmer is one heck of a quarterback. He'll be in his fare share of Pro Bowls, put up some real good numbers and will get some MVP talk from time to time. But I wonder if Palmer is thought to walk on water because he's that good or are Bengals fans just so starved for a good quarterback that as soon as a guy has one good season they'll deem him the second coming? So far I'm having a hard time deciding. Seems like anytime anyone brings up the fact that Palmer may not be the greatest quarterback in the history of football you get tons of people telling you how wonderful he is and why he's great. It's not just here, I hear it all the time when I talk football with my Bengal fan friends. I really hope this Palmer-love doesn't reach the Brett Favre level, because that would be a shame, but it wouldn't surprise me. From where I stand, I don't even know if you can say that Palmer is the best quarterback in his division. I'm sure that'll send the Palmerites into a frenzy and I'll be called crazy by some, but so far I can't see any reason to elevate Carson Palmer way above every other quarterback like some seem to.

Sea Ray
03-17-2006, 02:37 AM
So based on two games at the begining of the season, you were able to write off the rest of the guy's career?


Don't get carried away. I'm not writing off his career at all. I merely think Carson Palmer is a better QB. That's all.

Betterread
03-18-2006, 11:23 AM
Well now we know Daunte's value and it isn't even a first rd pick. The Dolphins set his value at a 2nd rd pick. We've also seen how much money the Bengals think Carson Palmer is worth. So yeah, no way would the Bengals trade Palmer for Culpepper. Heck the Bengals could have traded a 2nd rd pick for him like the Dolphins did.

It's ludicrous to even infer that Culpepper has a value in the ballpark as Carson Palmer

(I just read this thread because I have not been on Redszone for a while to attend to a family emergency.)
I have modified my perspective from that time to the present regarding a comparison between Carson Palmer and Culpepper. Palmer had a great year that resulted in the Bengals making the playoffs, while Culpepper had an awful year resulting in being indicted for an ugly misdemenaor. Many things have happened to alter my view of Culpepper since I defended him, and that includes many character issues that have come up regarding Culpepper.
Having said that, I don't know if a 2nd round pick was "value" for Daunte, as the team more or less had to trade him because he didn't want to play for them any longer and they didn't want to continue to pay him 60 million or so, for a variety of reasons. So, as a Vikings fan, I'm glad we got something for him (although given the recent lack of success the VIkings have had with 2nd round picks - we may end up with nothing.)
I hope Carson Palmer recovers from his serious knee injury and plays well enough to fulfill the high expectations you have of him.

Here's an article by John Clayton that sums up some aspect of the Culpepper situation.

Minnesota didn't get value for Moss or CulpepperBy John Clayton
ESPN.com
Archive

What are the Vikings thinking?

Two years ago, they were a trendy Super Bowl pick. They had Randy Moss at wide receiver and Daunte Culpepper at quarterback. Following the 2004 season, both players were 28-years-old and in their prime. Moss was the league's ultimate playmaker, a receiver almost impossible to overthrow and known for making the impossible catch, especially in the red zone.

Culpepper was a freak. The league's biggest starting quarterback at 268 pounds, Culpepper was a load for smaller opposing linebackers to bring down. Plus, he had the speed and moves to run like a halfback. On top of all that, he had a rocket arm and could average 30 touchdowns a year.

Vikings fans slept well at night knowing both Moss and Culpepper were under contract into their thirties. Moss was signed through 2008; Culpepper was signed through 2012.

So what are the Vikings thinking giving up both players within a year for wide receiver Troy Williamson, linebacker Napoleon Harris and a second-round pick in 2006? New owner Zygi Wilf wasn't part of the Moss trade. That was from the Red McCombs era.

The organization decided there were too many incidents involving Moss that were distractions. So the Vikings shopped him in a trade, didn't wait to get value and ended up getting the seventh pick in the draft and Harris, who ended up playing only 25 percent of the downs.

They drafted Williamson with that No. 7 pick last year. He is a fast deep threat, but he played in only 29 percent of the offensive downs last season. Harris' days in Minnesota are probably numbered, because the Vikings spent $4 million a year to get outside linebacker Ben Leber out of San Diego. Plus, Harris is in the final year of his contract.

Championship teams are built around five key positions -- quarterbacks, receivers, cornerbacks, tackles and defensive ends who are playmakers. The Vikings ended up giving up 40 percent of those cornerstone positions for Williamson, who is a fast prospect but caught only 24 passes for 372 yards in 2005, and whatever they get in the second round this year.

What are the Vikings thinking?

Thanks to good cap management, though, the Vikings have the salary space to bring in top players. Williamson might develop into a big-play threat. They hit gold with Koren Robinson, whom they re-signed after his amazing comeback season from alcohol problems (Robinson made the Pro Bowl in 2005 as a return man.)

The organization apparently didn't like Culpepper's contract demands this offseason. Moreover, he didn't hit it off with new head coach Brad Childress by not working out at the team facility. Culpepper preferred to train in Florida. New coaches want their quarterbacks in town.

The Dolphins were so determined to find a potential franchise quarterback that they were willing to give up a second-round pick to get Culpepper sight unseen, even though he had a knee reconstruction last fall. Top quarterbacks are hard to find, which is why it's so curious that the Vikings would give up Culpepper so cheaply.

Back in the Dennis Green days, the Vikings made trips to the playoffs each year, even though Green went through a long list of veteran quarterbacks in the later stages of their careers. Although that strategy might get you to the playoffs, it's hard to win a Super Bowl with what you might consider transitional quarterbacks.

Culpepper, when healthy, has the ability to win a Super Bowl. It's interesting that he's going to the Dolphins, a team, like the Vikings, that had nine wins in 2006. Miami head coach Nick Saban felt he got the most he could out of the aging Gus Frerotte.

The Dolphins juggled whether to trade for Culpepper or sign Drew Brees. Both had problems. Brees had shoulder surgery. Culpepper had a major knee surgery.

But look at the impact of what a quarterback can do.

Carson Palmer put the Bengals on the playoff map in Cincinnati. Fortunately, he went to a franchise that had a coach, Marvin Lewis, who knew what to do with such a commodity. He sat him for a year and let him blossom into a Pro Bowl quarterback.

If Palmer comes back from his knee injury, the Bengals, like the Steelers with Ben Roethlisberger, will be Super Bowl contenders every year. The Patriots won three Super Bowls with their franchise quarterback, Tom Brady.

Part of the Vikings' problem was the transition from McCombs to Wilf. They traded Moss, and McComb didn't give former head coach Mike Tice enough money to keep offensive coordinator Scott Linehan (now the Rams' head coach). The one-two impact of losing Moss and Linehan, plus poor blocking in the middle of the line, led to Culpepper having his worst season in five years.

For the Dolphins, Culpepper can pay huge dividends if he's healthy. The Vikings, with Childress as the coach, should make a playoff run with Brad Johnson, but they will be in the market for a franchise quarterback for the next few years.

The Vikings can only hope they can be as successful as the Seattle Mariners were when they went through a period in which they lost Ken Griffey Jr. and Alex Rodriguez.

The Mariners won games but no championships after Griffey and Rodriguez left. It's hard to replace franchise players, and the Vikings hardly got value. What are they thinking?

John Clayton is a senior writer for ESPN.co

Sea Ray
03-18-2006, 04:38 PM
Very good article by Clayton. I think he is on the money in his assessment. Thanks for posting it!