Missing Moss

[Mitty]

Who in their right mind would think this team is better without the best receiver in the league,Tices hourglass is running out fast Im predicting he will be gone after the bye week.Poor Wilf I hope he stays he seems like a nice guy,but you know what they say about nice guys.

[Neiko]

I like watching football but I am not an expert at all. However I felt they got rid of the wrong guy all along. Why do we continue to keep Culpecker? We should have gotten rid of him instead.

[nbdyknws]

We aren't missing Moss, we are having to deal with 2 egos in Tice and Culpepper.

We actually have the best overall recieving group in all of the NFL. With Taylor, Robinson, Robinson, Williamson, Burleson, Wiggins, Kliny. We are by no way hurting for pass catchers. I feel sorry for all of them and they will probably all want to be on other teams after this season. Who wants to play with a qb that is going to break every turnover record there is, and who knows at this rate he might break the sack record also.

[Down to Earth]

How do you call a bunch of cast offs the best group in the NFL? That's what you have with Taylor, Robinson. Combine them with Burleson and Williamson you pretty much have a group of average receivers. I can think of a few better corps I'd rather have than Minnesota's. I'd also rather have a group with 1 stud surrounded by a group of average guys.

[nbdyknws]

Taylor = former #1 reciever, K. Robinson = former #1 reciever, Burleson = well is #1 on Vikes but is a very solid #2 reciever, Williamson = Star in the making, Marcus Robinson = former #1 reciever

Sure all of them were number 1 recievers at one time but that is still pretty impressive, and by no means is Travis Taylor, Burleson, or Williamson past their prime. In fact if Dante would actually throw the ball I believe Taylor could have numbers equaling near a Moss or Owens, with maybe not as many yards.

But that is my take on them, and maybe it is just me being optimistic, and figured they should be getting the ball alot more.

[Down to Earth]

I can see where your coming from with them all being former #1s, but it isn't too often teams are letting there #1 wide out go, unless there is a good reason. Here are some career average yardage stats on the 3 coming into this year, TDs include this year.

Taylor- 551 yd/season, 41yd/game, 17 total TD

K.Robinson- 791 yd/season, 54/game, 12 total TD

M. Robinson- 475 yd/season, 46/game, 34 total TD

I guess my point is the NFL is full of receivers of this nature. True with the exeption of Robinson in Seattle, Taylor and Marcus, weren't playing in the most pass friendly offenses, but I don't think their numbers are that much above other wideouts in that they would out produce others in that situation. But on the other hand I think other wideouts of their ability would flourish just as good in MN.

I'm still not sold on Burleson as a #1. I wish he would stay healthy and I wish Culpepper could get him the ball. Remember everyone thought Peerless Price would make a great #1, but proved to be a great #2.

Williamson I think is too early to judge, but he has shown flashes at times the past couple weeks with Burleson out. Definately agree with you in he could be a star in the making.

Give it some time, if the Vikes offense gets turned around and C-Pep starts making completions, I'll be agreeing with you by the end of the season.

[fishyguy]

They are former #1 receivers on running teams. Koren Robinson was #1 on a team with Bobby Engram, Marcus Robinson was #1 on a team with Marty Booker, Travis Taylor was #1 with somebody I can't even think of. My point is these are talented guys but not your prototypical #1's. I think we have a large collection of #2's, which isn't bad.

On the Moss thing....I am just sick of hearing about it. There are 31 teams every year that don't have Randy Moss regardless of the jersey he is wearing. Of those 32 teams, approximately 16 will finish .500 or better and 12 will make the playoffs. I guess my point is, you do not need Randy Moss to win. If you do, you won't go far anyways as you must not have any talent around him. Here is a interesting stat: no Super Bowl team in the history of the NFL(winner or loser) has ever had Randy Moss in uniform. In fact, of all the playoff teams in the last 7 years (84 if my math is correct)only 3 or 4 have had Randy Moss on the team. How many Super Bowls did Rice win without Montana or Young, Taylor and Craig? How many did Lynn Swann win without Bradshaw and Harris? How about Irvin without Aikman or Emmitt? He is gone, I just want everyone to move on. Mistake or not, it does not matter. He is gone and never coming back. His team has the exact same record as the Vikes if I am not mistaken. So I guess he wasn't the savior in Oakland either.

[james_walleye]

Your nuts if you think the vikings wouldnt have faired better offensively in these games with Moss. Thats all there is too it. They werent even competitive. At least last year when they lost they were competitive. Not saying they cant win without Moss, but you add Moss too this current team and its better, there is no way you can say its not. Your a fool after watching 4 games if you think that Moss didnt open everything up for the offense. Dante isnt as good without him. The rest of the recievers arent as good without him. And the running game isnt as good without him. Hes not there too take all the attention anymore. The teams dont have too play 2 or 3 defenders too one guy anymore. Those guys can play run more. And now the other recievers arent running around with single coverage all over. Now the best corner is covering Burleson or Taylor, whoever are #1 is out there and they cant get open. It was alot easier for Burleson too get open last year against the other teams #2 corner single covered rather than the other teams #1 corner plus a safety shaded his way. Now the safeties dont have too worry about Moss streaking down the field and now they can play the run harder because we wont throw the ball deep anymore. You would see a dropoff from any team if a reciever of that caliber left. You cant replace his presence on the field.

[fishyguy]

James,

I don't think this "fool" ever said that they would not be better offensively with Moss. If you reread the post carefully you will notice that it can be broken down into these simple items.

I am sick of talking/hearing about him

We weren't winning anything with him.

His current team in not winning anything with him

And all other successful teams do not have him.

The post was about myself wanting to move on and stating the reasons why. I did not mean to get anyone worked up but simply tried to illustrate why I wanted to move on and why having Moss gone did not really change our prospects of really winning. We were 8-8 with him. Is 6-10 or anything else going to be that different if we still are a also ran? I would rather suck and try to make changes to be better than to be stuck in permanent mediocrity with no hope of ever changing.

[james_walleye]

I wasnt calling you or anyone else here a fool and im sorry i didnt mean too make it sound like i was implying that. But i continue too talk with people in general out and about who think missing Moss has nothing too do with the offensive problems. No this team didnt win a superbowl with Moss your right. But the problem here with everyone else you mentioned, the cowboys, the 49ers, the steelers, they all had defenses too. Thats a big part of why they won superbowls. The vikings had one of the worst 5 defenses pretty much every year Moss was here except his rookie year. They went too the NFC championship game in 2000 with a defense that was absolutely horrible. Can you imagine what the vikings might have accomplished have any kind of defense?? Not a top ten defense, just an average defense?? Thats the whole problem, now do you not only have a subpar defense you have an offense that looks rotten also. The answer too the superbowl was keeping Moss and finally getting some defense in here. The raiders, yeah they've lost, but they could have just as well won every game so far as well. And you know what, there defense is rotten too. Thats why they arent going too win jack, not because of Moss. The most dangerous player in the game is no longer in purple and in hindsight looks like a terrible move. It needs too be talked about and if it continues someone should be held accountable for such a jacka$$ move. If it was made just too clear a personality, fine just say that, but we dont want too hear about the move was made too make this team better and how it was going too help the vikings get too the superbowl, because clearly that wasnt going too work and it clearly isnt the case. Moss was not the problem with not getting too a superbowl. He could have been a big part of why this team finally got back too the superbowl if we would have had an owner who would have coughed up some jing for a defense and an owner who would have not hired a coach just because he was cheap, but because he was highly qualified. Then that highly qualified coach could have had his guys as his assistants and we would have seen a team out there disciplined and ready too play every game and a team that would have played all 16 games at a high level. Thats how it all should have worked, then nothing would have ever been said about Randy Moss, everything would have been just fine, and we maybe would have seen some more postseason success. But none of that happened, just the opposite has happened, and our team looks rotten. No Moss, what looks too be a terrible coaching staff who cant put people in the right places and cant get anyone up too play a game, an offense that has no punch. 1 guy doesnt win a superbowl, but it wouldnt have taken much too add enough talent too do so, the cap room was there, but Red wouldnt spend any money. Thats why the vikings didnt go too a superbowl with Moss.

[fishyguy]

No problems James. I was mostly just being a wise a$$. I am way to big of a opinionated loud mouth around here at times to be offended by a "fool" comment. I think we are probably in agreement but just wanting to deal with it in different ways. If I had control over it heads would roll or I would send Red the horse head from the Godfather but I am not so I choose to move on with talking about improving on what we got to work with.

[kato811]

i think there missing matt birk more than there missing moss . birk plays hard every play all game long . as far as moss goes he hasent changed any he still takes plays off

[united jigsticker]

Alot of receivers in the game take plays off.

They used to critisize Moss for not bursting off the line on running plays.

I watched 3 games last weekend, and payed special attention to receivers on run plays...They didn't do anything...so...leave the guy alone.

I play football. I take plays off...I'm lined up on one side and I know the ball isn't coming to me on a scripted play...Hey...the corner is still on me...Not like he's saying...hmm, he's taking the play off...I'll go double the other guy....

3 step drop, boom, hits the tight end that released on the other side, and I have more energy for the next play.

[196thDLR]

It has been over 35 years since I have played the game of football, but, we had a coach that had been an All-American tackle from the University of Michigan. Coach had a few words of wisdom that he used every week in the preparation for the upcoming game. Here are a couple of them, " If the big butts lined up in front of the quarterback do not do their jobs, we will NOT WIN, " and, " It is not the size of the dog in a fight, it is the size of the fight in the dog."

The first quote was for the offense and the second was for the defense. Since the Vikings have neither, I think we are looking at a Top 5 pick in the 2006 Draft. The Vikings did not win with Moss and we are not winning without him, what has changed? I am not saying he is not a great player, he is argueably the most dangerous wideout playing today.

[james_walleye]

No the vikings didnt win a SB with Moss but the quickest way too a superbowl was too keep the biggest weapon in the game and build a defense too go with that offense. Moss made it easy too score points. Thats why you dont let something like that go.

[196thDLR]

JW: You are right, Moss IS the most dangerous player in the NFL today. Remember the 40 for 60 team? Those players on the Vikings roster that year were fadeing stars in the NFL, yet they won. Those guys played as a team!!!! You rarely ever saw a player sitting on the bench, they were standing on the sidelines supporting the unit on the field.

It now takes 180 minutes to 210 minutes to play a 60 minute game!!! These guys are paid more money in one year than some countries GNP, to play a game. Yeah, I realize I am on a soapbox, so I'll get back on track.

Randy Moss has a great many excellent qualities, as well as being a gifted athlete. The media has hounded this guy ever since he was drafted. On one side of the media's mouth they will tell the world how gifted an athlete he is, while out of the other side of their mouths, they are vilifying the man and then hide behind the First Amendment by saying the people have a right to know! { I guess you can tell how I feel about the media.} Would the Vikings be a better team with him still on the roster? I do not think so, we would be a more dangerous team, but not better, because these guys are not a team yet.

[james_walleye]

I guess my contention has been that it would have been one heck of a lot easier too build a superbowl caliber team that included Moss rather than a team that doesnt include him.

[kato811]

james i dont think mos will win a super bowl hes one of the best there is but he has problems that keep him an his team mates down . he had to go here his special traatment an attutude was wrecking the team

[Mitty]

I agree with alot being said its just sad that they all couldnt get along,as for culpecker he is a physical specimen but lets be honest he went to central florida for a reason,dead from the neck up MEATHEAD!

[196thDLR]

Like Mitty, I do agree with a vast majority of what is being said. How do you guys feel about Trent Dilfer? Harrington from Detroit? Who is quarterbacking Chicago? Oh, Kyle Orton. Granted Orton came from a D1A school, Culpepper came from a D1AA school, one step down. When the O-Line can give him the required 2-1/2 to 4 seconds to make his reads, and get rid of the ball, he does pretty darn good. When the O-Line does not, he looks as if he should have chosen a different occupation. It all starts with the big butts.

The reason I mentioned the other quarterbacks, is Culpepper better or worse? Moss can make any quarterback look good, but it still takes Moss a few seconds to get down the field. Now you have to have the arm to get it to Moss. Not many QB's do.

[james_walleye]

Listen the vikings twice got too the NFC championship game with Moss and subpar defenses. Those offenses got those teams too where they were and Moss was the centerpiece. There was about 6 plays in that 1998 game that had things gone right on any one of them the vikings would have been in the superbowl and possibly could have won it. As in any player, not Moss, its not just 1 guy that wins a superbowl. Things have too be in place around any special player. From Favre, too Elway, too whomever. My point is it would have been much easier too build a superbowl caliber team with Moss here than now that hes gone. Moss may not win a superbowl, but it will be because things arent in place around him. Terrell Owens and Marvin Harrison may never win a superbowl either but it wont be because of them. If things get in place around Moss he'll win a superbowl just as any other reciever can. I dont care how special an offensive talent you are, if your defense is ranked 29th your not going too win a superbowl.

[hamrej23]

moss made our team no better than we are now, its our line, coaching, and team character. HOW MANY GAMES HAS OAKLAND WON?

DC is going to come through, he is to good of a player to put BJ in at age 40. you dont do that. Dauntes inferno will fire up again and get his roll on. dont jump off the bandwagon just cause he has had a bad first 3 games out of 4.

[united jigsticker]

"Don't be jealous because I've been chatting with babes all day on the internet."

Quote; Napolean Dynamite.

[united jigsticker]

"Don't worry, I just played Madden '05, and Daunte threw 4 TD's against...Da' Bears.

Bears...Bears...Bears...Ditka...Bears...Sausage...Sausage...Bears...

[james_walleye]

You can actually sit and say that if Moss was playing for the vikes through the these first 4 games that this offense would have looked like this??? Come on now, i can go with alot of things but no way in heck i can go with that. Its no coincidence that its Culpeppers worst stretch of his career. No way Culpepper throws all the interceptions he has if Moss is here. Oakland is 1-3 because there defense is worthless!!! They could just as easy be 4-0, they've been right there in every game even with that worthless defense. They stayed with the patriots, the eagles beat them on a last second FG, and they almost had the chiefs. Thats some pretty good teams too be hanging around with. Being in every game is something the vikings know nothing about. I agree the team looks unprepared, no doubt about it. But how many times do i have too say it, having a weapon like Moss makes things easier. Losing a weapon like Moss doesnt make it easier too get too a superbowl. How can you say taking Randy Moss and adding it too this same bunch of guys playing this year would not make the team better?? Having a weapon like that doesnt make your team worse. It makes it easier too play football and score points. If its easier too score points its easier too win football games. Randy Moss made it easier too score points and hence scoring more points obviously makes it easier too win a football game. Theres no arguement here. This team couldnt look any worse, theres no way putting Moss on this team makes things worse, it cant get any worse than it is. Im not jumping off any bandwagon, im diehard viking fan, but i look at things realistically not through purple colored glasses. We all hope that Culpepper gets things together, but its a hope, not at all a guarantee.