Dante Culpepper Sucks / Evaluating QB's - Page 5

twins15 · 11-14-2005, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sublimity

I don't know who got to watch the game from yesterday, with the play of Tice being taken out and his knee bent funny. It looked bad, and I'm sure it hurt, but didn't he push himself up off it? At any rate, he later claimed he tore his ACL, MCL, and PCL. That's just what the sideline reporter said, so I don't know if he said it in jest (which I'm hoping is the case, for his sake). But that's the injury that took out Rodney Harrison, and without those ligaments, I don't think the knee moves right, much less is able to help you stand up. Anyway, I don't think I have a point to this post.

Too bad for Minnesota that isn't putting Tice on the IR (there, that's my point).

From what I've heard he sprained his MCL.

billethius · 11-14-2005, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian0622

It's going to be interesting to follow. On the one hand, McNabb put up his 3rd highest QB rating game of the season without TO versus a tough 'Skins defense. On the other hand, based on how poorly he was performing with TO this year compared to the past few years with TO, it's hard to know how much his injury had affected him earlier this year. So if stays healthy from here on out and plays just as well without TO as he did with him, the question will be how much did the injury in the early season affect him?

Anyway, I fully expect a healthy McNabb to perform no better without TO for the remainder of the season than a seriously injured McNabb played with TO earlier in the season.

Hold on a second here. Earlier in the thread you call people out for 'making excuses' for quarterback performance that doesn't match up to your theory, and then in this post, you use McNabb's injury to explain why his season may not match what you proposed in the initial post. I don't think you can have it both ways.

Sublimity · 11-14-2005, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuestGAV

Your ACl/MCL/PCL hold your lower leg in place on your upper leg. Without them, the lower leg just sort of flops around, like you saw with Harrison's injury. It takes a pretty significant amount of force to tear all three.

Yeah, by "move right" I meant "move correctly" not "move to the direction that is to the right." And it was pretty obvious he didn't tear all three, which is why I thought it was a stupid thing to say. Unless he did it jokingly, which isn't information we got from the sideline reporter (Pam Oliver, maybe).

Melo · 11-14-2005, 12:51 PM

I think the Minnesota situation was FUBAR a few years ago under Tice and it has only gotten worse. Because of that I think it is too hard to accurately evaluate Culpepper. Maybe Culpepper can't be evaluated until he plays for a real coach?

Luis_Rivera · 11-14-2005, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melo

I think the Minnesota situation was FUBAR a few years ago under Tice and it has only gotten worse. Because of that I think it is too hard to accurately evaluate Culpepper. Maybe Culpepper can't be evaluated until he plays for a real coach?

Well, that's the thing... He had one of the greatest seasons of all time last year under Tice.

Sublimity · 11-14-2005, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luis_Rivera

Well, that's the thing... He had one of the greatest seasons of all time last year in spite of Tice.

I'd say fixed, but you were responding to Melo's post. But that's how I feel about the situation. From the "Randy Ratio" to the "Running Back by Confusion" systems, it seems Tice has no real idea what to do on offense. And when you look at the defense (how many top talents/draft picks have gone there and underperformed or never reached potential? I'm guessing it's a few standard deviations from the mean), you can see how poor of a coach he really is.

That said, his "system" may have worked perfectly for Culpepper with Moss, since it seemed most of the system was have receivers run around and have Culpepper try to make something happen. With his mobility, strong arm, and Moss, that seemed to work some for Culpepper. I'd say a lot of that had to do with Moss, but it could be if Culpepper were in a real system, he wouldn't need Moss to be great. We just can't tell at this point.

Skipaway · 11-14-2005, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sublimity

That said, his "system" may have worked perfectly for Culpepper with Moss, since it seemed most of the system was have receivers run around and have Culpepper try to make something happen. With his mobility, strong arm, and Moss, that seemed to work some for Culpepper. I'd say a lot of that had to do with Moss, but it could be if Culpepper were in a real system, he wouldn't need Moss to be great. We just can't tell at this point.

That's the point I tried to make earlier in this argument. A lot of change in quarterback ratings might just be a result of if the coaches are matching the right schemes to the right players.

Luis_Rivera · 11-14-2005, 01:13 PM

I agree that it was "in spite of" Tice... but my point was that to say that he can't be truly evaluated until Tice is gone doesn't make much sense since Culpepper has performed with Tice in the picture.

Sublimity · 11-14-2005, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luis_Rivera

I agree that it was "in spite of" Tice... but my point was that to say that he can't be truly evaluated until Tice is gone doesn't make much sense since Culpepper has performed with Tice in the picture.

That's true, because I look at it this way: If Tice leaves (and a real coach comes in) and Culpepper still struggles, we can say it was because of Moss.

If Tice leaves and Culpepper is as good as he was last year, we can conclude Culpepper is just as good without Moss, or we can wonder how good he would have been with a real coach AND Moss.

sebastian0622 · 11-14-2005, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billethius

Hold on a second here. Earlier in the thread you call people out for 'making excuses' for quarterback performance that doesn't match up to your theory, and then in this post, you use McNabb's injury to explain why his season may not match what you proposed in the initial post. I don't think you can have it both ways.

No, no no...no. I've said that there are always a ton of factors, and larger sample sizes even them out. Since McNabb's remaining games is a pretty small sample size, those factors won't be evened out as much within that one sample as they will within the larger sample.

Mark Guest · 11-14-2005, 01:57 PM

Just a headsup, Culpeppers QB rating is worse when Matt Birk doesn't play, than when Randy Moss didn't play.

Sublimity · 11-14-2005, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Guest

Just a headsup, Culpeppers QB rating is worse when Matt Birk doesn't play, than when Randy Moss didn't play.

And when Birk and Moss both aren't there... he gets injured. So my theory is, Skinner likes dog food.

(That's probably my favorite unused-by-the-masses Simpsons reference evah)

sebastian0622 · 11-27-2005, 06:04 PM

Brad Johnson won his fourth straight start today. He has compiled a season QB rating of 78.6, or 6.6 points higher than Culpepper managed in his 7 games this season.

Skipaway · 11-27-2005, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian0622

Brad Johnson won his fourth straight start today. He has compiled a season QB rating of 78.6, or 6.6 points higher than Culpepper managed in his 7 games this season.

As I said earlier, I would believe all these just shows how poorly the coaches are at adjusting life without Moss.

It's not that Johnson is better than Culpepper, but rather Johnson is put in a much more suiting role. Johnson isn't asked to do much, because the team didn't expect much from him.

However, Culpepper definitely was either asked to do too much, or just tried to do too much. The coaches probably couldn't recognize what was contributed by Moss, and what was contributed by Culpepper for the great numbers last year, and over-estimated Culpepper, and over-taxed him.

So it's not just Randy Moss leaving, but also poor adjustment by the team.

sebastian0622 · 11-27-2005, 06:23 PM

You can believe that, skip. I'll just believe it's Randy Moss leaving. I can't disprove your theory, other than to ask if it also applied to Jeff Garcia and Donovan McNabb.

Seems like a lot of very highly-paid NFL coaches are having a hard time with these "adjustments" that are costing their QB's 15-20 points of QB rating.

Jason Moyer · 11-27-2005, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skipaway

That's the point I tried to make earlier in this argument. A lot of change in quarterback ratings might just be a result of if the coaches are matching the right schemes to the right players.

If I had to make any guess on what the most important factor to a QB's stats was, outside of his own skills, it would be coaching.

TBH, I'd also consider rating the importance of the QB's own defense higher than the importance of his #1 WR in most cases since the team's passing strategy is typically dictated by how many points the other team scores. I would be interested in seeing a year-by-year analysis of the passing stats of losing teams vs winning teams (among other breakdowns). I suspect that, like defense in baseball, losing teams tend to have more impressive passing stats since they're trying to make up large deficits more often.

sebastian0622 · 11-27-2005, 06:43 PM

Actually, none of the top 10 QB's in passer rating play for bad teams.

PHP Code:


			
1 Palmer     CIN    105.6

2 Manning   IND       104.6

3 Brees       SD     100.0

4 Brady       NE       96.2

5 Bulger      STL      94.4

6 Plummer  DEN       92.5

7 Bledsoe    DAL     91.8

8 Hasselbeck SEA   89.3

9 Leftwich    JAC   89.1

10 Brunell    WAS  86.0

I think all of those teams are .500 and above, and many are the best teams in the league. If Big Ben were eligible, he'd be up there too.

Skipaway · 11-27-2005, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian0622

You can believe that, skip. I'll just believe it's Randy Moss leaving. I can't disprove your theory, other than to ask if it also applied to Jeff Garcia and Donovan McNabb.

Seems like a lot of very highly-paid NFL coaches are having a hard time with these "adjustments" that are costing their QB's 15-20 points of QB rating.

I am not saying it's not Moss, just saying it could be like 8 point Moss, and 7 point Tice.

sebastian0622 · 11-27-2005, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skipaway

I am not saying it's not Moss, just saying it could be like 8 point Moss, and 7 point Tice.

How do you explain McNabb's 25-point breakout after he got T.O.?

Skipaway · 11-27-2005, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian0622

How do you explain McNabb's 25-point breakout after he got T.O.?

Owens' talent plus the coaches recognized how many more things they can do in the passing game with Owens?

11-14-2005, 01:57 PM	#91
Mark Guest Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 258	Just a headsup, Culpeppers QB rating is worse when Matt Birk doesn't play, than when Randy Moss didn't play. __________________ Hickory Baseball League - Baltimore Orioles (WS Champs) Cooperstown Diamond Legends - Detroit Tigers (0-0) Smallball coming soon

11-27-2005, 06:43 PM	#97
sebastian0622 Banned Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,465	Actually, none of the top 10 QB's in passer rating play for bad teams. PHP Code: `1 Palmer CIN 105.6 2 Manning IND 104.6 3 Brees SD 100.0 4 Brady NE 96.2 5 Bulger STL 94.4 6 Plummer DEN 92.5 7 Bledsoe DAL 91.8 8 Hasselbeck SEA 89.3 9 Leftwich JAC 89.1 10 Brunell WAS 86.0` I think all of those teams are .500 and above, and many are the best teams in the league. If Big Ben were eligible, he'd be up there too.

11-14-2005, 12:51 PM	#84
Melo All Star Starter Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Where the baned reside Posts: 1,428	I think the Minnesota situation was FUBAR a few years ago under Tice and it has only gotten worse. Because of that I think it is too hard to accurately evaluate Culpepper. Maybe Culpepper can't be evaluated until he plays for a real coach?

11-14-2005, 01:13 PM	#88
Luis_Rivera Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 4,177	I agree that it was "in spite of" Tice... but my point was that to say that he can't be truly evaluated until Tice is gone doesn't make much sense since Culpepper has performed with Tice in the picture.

11-27-2005, 06:04 PM	#93
sebastian0622 Banned Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,465	Brad Johnson won his fourth straight start today. He has compiled a season QB rating of 78.6, or 6.6 points higher than Culpepper managed in his 7 games this season.

11-27-2005, 06:23 PM	#95
sebastian0622 Banned Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,465	You can believe that, skip. I'll just believe it's Randy Moss leaving. I can't disprove your theory, other than to ask if it also applied to Jeff Garcia and Donovan McNabb. Seems like a lot of very highly-paid NFL coaches are having a hard time with these "adjustments" that are costing their QB's 15-20 points of QB rating.