Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 48
  1. #21
    NDVikingFan66's Avatar
    NDVikingFan66 is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,831

    Re: Maybe Vikings were right about Culpepper and Moss

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "VikemanX84" wrote:
    All I know is that with half-healthy Moss and a fully healthy Culpepper we had one of the best offenses in the league and made the playoffs.
    And even when we lost they were at least fun to watch.
    Now we have one of the worst offenses in team history and even when we win (rarely), they aren't very fun to watch.
    We had and have plenty of cap space, so I don't think the cap savings have helped us that much, especially when we use it on guys like Bobby Wade and Visanthe Shanicoe.

    WHAT?
    Give me a freaking break.
    With Moss and Culpepper together we had an overall regular season record of 39-41!
    Yes, they made the playoffs twice.
    Once in 2000 on their own merit.
    And once in 2004 where they just didn't suck as much as everybody else (8-8 record? Come on).
    And watching the 2000-2005 Vikings defense was about as fun as a root canal.

    Give Childress the same amount of time - 5 years -, and I guarantee that not only will we have a winning record, but we will be in the playoffs too.
    Wow....have to be honest...I would have thought during that time we were better than 39-41.
    I did not think we were tons better, but better none the less.

    Interesting

  2. #22
    ejmat is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,849

    Re: Maybe Vikings were right about Culpepper and Moss

    "singersp" wrote:
    "ejmat" wrote:

    Even if Pep ever makes it to the Superbowl it doesn't mean anything.
    The fact is while he was with the Vikings he under achieved.
    He may have had the stats sometimes but that means nothing.

    Only 2 years of playoffs is nothing special.
    They parted ways at the right time with Pep.
    Sure, he may revive his career but right now he is even more of a question mark than TJack.
    Crotch sniffer or not I'm glad Pep is elsewhere.
    Then I guess that means Moss's stats or any other players stats on the Vikings those years means nothing. Right?


    While 2 years in the playoffs is nothing special to you, it's 2 more than a lot of teams in the NFL had.
    There are teams out there who wish they'd have made it twice in as many years.
    What do stats really mean?
    They are nice but obviously they don't mean you win games.
    They may contribute to it.
    Besides, I was referring more to Peps stats not meaning anything more so than Moss.
    The difference is Moss wasn't the route of many turnovers.
    I can't say he didn't have any but no where's near as many as Pep.
    Of course, that comes with being a QB vs a WR.



    Anyway my point is the stats really don't mean much when you don't win games.
    Sure they were fun to watch and I miss watching Moss catching TDs.
    Honestly, I believe (an I may get a little hammered here) that the combination lost more games then won.
    The reason is they try to score too quick too often.
    Hence, not giving Pep the chance to learn how to manage the clock and learn defenses and not giving the defense a chance to rest.
    I admit that may not be true however it may not be false either.

  3. #23
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: Maybe Vikings were right about Culpepper and Moss

    "ejmat" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "ejmat" wrote:

    Even if Pep ever makes it to the Superbowl it doesn't mean anything.
    The fact is while he was with the Vikings he under achieved.
    He may have had the stats sometimes but that means nothing.

    Only 2 years of playoffs is nothing special.
    They parted ways at the right time with Pep.
    Sure, he may revive his career but right now he is even more of a question mark than TJack.
    Crotch sniffer or not I'm glad Pep is elsewhere.
    Then I guess that means Moss's stats or any other players stats on the Vikings those years means nothing. Right?


    While 2 years in the playoffs is nothing special to you, it's 2 more than a lot of teams in the NFL had.
    There are teams out there who wish they'd have made it twice in as many years.
    What do stats really mean?
    They are nice but obviously they don't mean you win games.
    They may contribute to it.
    Besides, I was referring more to Peps stats not meaning anything more so than Moss.
    The difference is Moss wasn't the route of many turnovers.
    I can't say he didn't have any but no where's near as many as Pep.
    Of course, that comes with being a QB vs a WR.



    Anyway my point is the stats really don't mean much when you don't win games.
    Sure they were fun to watch and I miss watching Moss catching TDs.
    Honestly, I believe (an I may get a little hammered here) that the combination lost more games then won.
    The reason is they try to score too quick too often.
    Hence, not giving Pep the chance to learn how to manage the clock and learn defenses and not giving the defense a chance to rest.

    I admit that may not be true however it may not be false either.
    And thus the Randy Ratio was born.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  4. #24
    ejmat is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,849

    Re: Maybe Vikings were right about Culpepper and Moss

    "singersp" wrote:
    "ejmat" wrote:
    "singersp" wrote:
    "ejmat" wrote:

    Even if Pep ever makes it to the Superbowl it doesn't mean anything.
    The fact is while he was with the Vikings he under achieved.
    He may have had the stats sometimes but that means nothing.

    Only 2 years of playoffs is nothing special.
    They parted ways at the right time with Pep.
    Sure, he may revive his career but right now he is even more of a question mark than TJack.
    Crotch sniffer or not I'm glad Pep is elsewhere.
    Then I guess that means Moss's stats or any other players stats on the Vikings those years means nothing. Right?


    While 2 years in the playoffs is nothing special to you, it's 2 more than a lot of teams in the NFL had.
    There are teams out there who wish they'd have made it twice in as many years.
    What do stats really mean?
    They are nice but obviously they don't mean you win games.
    They may contribute to it.
    Besides, I was referring more to Peps stats not meaning anything more so than Moss.
    The difference is Moss wasn't the route of many turnovers.
    I can't say he didn't have any but no where's near as many as Pep.
    Of course, that comes with being a QB vs a WR.



    Anyway my point is the stats really don't mean much when you don't win games.
    Sure they were fun to watch and I miss watching Moss catching TDs.
    Honestly, I believe (an I may get a little hammered here) that the combination lost more games then won.
    The reason is they try to score too quick too often.
    Hence, not giving Pep the chance to learn how to manage the clock and learn defenses and not giving the defense a chance to rest.

    I admit that may not be true however it may not be false either.
    And thus the Randy Ratio was born.
    The best theory ever.
    LOL

  5. #25
    Vikes_King's Avatar
    Vikes_King is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    7,104

    Re: Maybe Vikings were right about Culpepper and Moss

    The added flexibility also helped the team to extend the contracts of some of their best young players in pro-bowl defensive tackle Kevin Williams and Serena Williams’ boyfriend Bryant McKinnie, who plays left tackle for the Vikings in his spare time. By the way, Minnesota should look into securing the rights to any offspring this colossal coupling potentially produces.

    But even if the Serena & Mount McKinnie union doesn’t bear fruit for the Vikings, their decision to part ways with Moss and Culpepper already has.

    Incidentally, does anybody know what kind of wine goes best with crow?
    lol, found this part of this article pretty damn funny.

    Now try and imagine Serena & McKinnie sex.

    eck


    http://vikesking.blogspot.com/

    "We’ll win our own Super Bowl, with our own players. Real Vikings. Something Brett Favre can never be."

    - Dan Calabrese

  6. #26
    NDVikingFan66's Avatar
    NDVikingFan66 is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,831

    Re: Maybe Vikings were right about Culpepper and Moss

    nothing wrong with picturing serena having sex.....but McKinnie could kill her

  7. #27
    Mr Anderson's Avatar
    Mr Anderson is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    7,692

    Re: Maybe Vikings were right about Culpepper and Moss

    "NDVikingFan66" wrote:
    nothing wrong with picturing serena having sex.....but McKinnie could kill her
    I'm pretty sure McKinnie could kill anyone. He knocked out former heavyweight champion Shannon Briggs outside of a Miami night club when he was playing there.


  8. #28
    VikemanX84 is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,433

    Re: Maybe Vikings were right about Culpepper and Moss

    "NDVikingFan66" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "VikemanX84" wrote:
    All I know is that with half-healthy Moss and a fully healthy Culpepper we had one of the best offenses in the league and made the playoffs.
    And even when we lost they were at least fun to watch.
    Now we have one of the worst offenses in team history and even when we win (rarely), they aren't very fun to watch.
    We had and have plenty of cap space, so I don't think the cap savings have helped us that much, especially when we use it on guys like Bobby Wade and Visanthe Shanicoe.

    WHAT?
    Give me a freaking break.
    With Moss and Culpepper together we had an overall regular season record of 39-41!
    Yes, they made the playoffs twice.
    Once in 2000 on their own merit.
    And once in 2004 where they just didn't suck as much as everybody else (8-8 record? Come on).
    And watching the 2000-2005 Vikings defense was about as fun as a root canal.

    Give Childress the same amount of time - 5 years -, and I guarantee that not only will we have a winning record, but we will be in the playoffs too.
    When you start talking about the overall record you have to take into consideration a lot of other things - like how God-awfully horrible our defense was, or our runing game, or our (at times) our offensive line.
    If you remember, in 2004 and 2000 we won a playoff game, so we couldn't have been that horrible.
    An 8-8 isn't glamourous but I'll take it over 6-10.
    Either way, I was just saying we were a way better offense with Randy and Daunte, if not a better team.


    You make a pretty big guarentee about Childress there that was really based on nothing but your hunch that Childress will pan out.
    Sure hope this first time head coach knows exactly what he is doing....
    When it s all said and done, you ll have to admit we re number 1!

  9. #29
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: Maybe Vikings were right about Culpepper and Moss

    Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 10:21 am

    [size=13pt]Two Trades Revisited[/size]

    -- Dan Dietzel, Minnesota Vikings

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  10. #30
    NDVikingFan66's Avatar
    NDVikingFan66 is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,831

    Re: Maybe Vikings were right about Culpepper and Moss

    Daunte really needs to get an agent to babysit him.

    The writer hit some good points.
    I was disappointed in the Moss trade only because I knew I was going to miss some great catches and great plays.
    I felt he was on the decline though, and also felt he was not doing anything positive for team chemistry.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Culpepper and Moss ?!?!
    By StillPurple in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-04-2008, 06:32 PM
  2. Moss and Culpepper reunion?
    By MississippiViking in forum Post Wasteland
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-07-2007, 08:53 PM
  3. Culpepper vs. Moss: Let's get it on!!!!!
    By bono in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-17-2005, 04:00 AM
  4. Wow, Culpepper and Moss!
    By MossWilliamsHenderson in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-17-2004, 11:30 PM
  5. moss and culpepper
    By outcast316 in forum Trash the Pack
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-26-2003, 02:01 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •