Originally Posted by Sea Ray
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.