Would've We gone to Playoffs if Brad Johnson Started?

**PurplePackerEater** · 02-06-2006, 06:26 PM

I agree with Del, you can't turn the ball over 5 times and expect to win.

IMO, I think after the 3rd or 4th horrible game we should have sat Pep, it was obvious he was in way over his head and had some defensive studying to do. Now, he's torn up his knee and we don't really know what lies ahead.

Del Rio · 02-06-2006, 06:26 PM

I wont argue in this thread simply because it is begging for trouble. It is asking a question NONE of us know.

I will say this though. The defense was playing at a high level all year. Culpepper had 14 interceptions and a bunch of fumbles.

When you play defense you need to be off the field every once and a while to rest. When Culpepper was in the game they were not, and that is why they began to slip every game.

I credit the improved defensive play to two factors

A) Brad Johnson. He managed the game, he didn't turn the ball over which gives our defense more rest and more time to be coached on their mistakes, go over suggestions from players and coaches and gather themselves in between series.

B) Antione Winfield openly telling Cottrell to simplify his packages.

Things on the field happen for a reason, it isn't just you wake up one day and so wow we can play as a team now. If it did happen like that the odds of them happening at the exact moment that Brad took over and the turnovers stopped are pretty laughable.

**V4L** · 02-06-2006, 06:29 PM

It didn't just happen overnight no..

Happened when we didn't have to play teams like the Bengals and Bucs who are very good and explosive on O.. And have extremely solid D's..

We got better cuz we were gelling for weeks and started playing teams like the Lions..

I don't want to argue either.. No one is right.. Can't tell if we would have won.. Or if the D was actaully solid all year.. All I know is we were in the bottom 5 in D before we went on our streak

**Mr-holland** · 02-06-2006, 06:30 PM

Perhaps, i think so

Del Rio · 02-06-2006, 06:35 PM

I'm sure there are a hundred threads hashing it out. You can't logically discuss this topic because people seem to think that by giving Johnson Credit they are turning their backs on Culpepper.

You would almost think that people are upset that Johnson came in and saved the season.

That is why I try to avoid Culpepper threads anymore because his fan base will totally disregard reason and bash anyone and everyone on the team in order to protect that bond they have.

The guy should have been sat. He was turning the ball over, and IMO that was the single biggest reason we were in the situation we were in.

This poll should have a 3rd option of: Who the fuck knows, do I look like Nostrodamus.

**ultravikingfan** · 02-06-2006, 06:39 PM

This thread has the potential to explode like most of the other like this did.

I could care less what happened, cannot be changed and has no bearing on next year. Let them battle it out. Whoever is better I am sure the coaches will start.

If I wanted to dwell on the past, I would still be crying about Steve Dils not getting a fair shake with us.

**ejmat** · 02-06-2006, 06:41 PM

I'm not going to say we would or wouldn't have. There are too many variables to tell. I will say that DCs poor play had an effect on the loss column. Other things to consider are: our d was beat up for the beginning of the year. Smoot was hurt all of training camp, Sharper was out, B-Will was out, etc...

I think BJ gave a calming effect that DC didn't and was able to control this team more so than DC. He didn't fumble everytime he was hit wither. I will make a judgement that if Pep played in that Giants game we would have lost. I say that because IMO he would have fumbled that play that BJ was sacked and hit hard. That would have easily been a TD the other way if BJ had fumbled the ball.

Our D played very well against TB the first game. If it weren't for 2 TDs by Wiggins being called back and 11 guys in the box on Cadillac William's run for a TD, the Vikings win that game. As far as beating Chicago, they played their scrubs for 3 1/2 quarters. Can't take that into account. If the game meant something to the Bears they would have played things differently.