PDA

View Full Version : Maybe Vikings were right about Culpepper and Moss



singersp
06-16-2007, 04:00 AM
Published - Saturday, June 16, 2007

Dave Myers column: Maybe Vikings were right about Culpepper and Moss (http://www.lacrossetribune.com/articles/2007/06/16/sports/00myers.txt)

By Dave Myers / La Crosse Tribune

Over the past couple of years the people in the Minnesota Vikings’ front office have received a great deal of criticism for some of their personnel decisions. Among the most controversial: trading the two most dynamic players on the roster, Randy Moss and then Daunte Culpepper the following year. Well the time has come for the naysayers — myself included — to enjoy a nice big serving of crow....

sleepagent
06-16-2007, 07:54 AM
As funny as it might sound . . . I think it's still too early to write of the careers of either player.

This year should be really interesting to watch, but I feel MOSS has a much better chance of reviving his career than CULPEPPER does, but either can bounce back in the right situation.

mountainviking
06-16-2007, 11:06 AM
There is truth to both sides of that.
I think they could both thrive again, in the right situation, BUT I also believe that neither will ever be quite what they were for us!

Moss' Hammy was a serious problem and still might be.
He doesn't seem to have the work ethic to keep it stretched and loose.
He'll probably do well for NE, but Brady likes to spread it out, so it most likely won't be huge.

And, I was a huge fan of Daunte, but he wined his way out of here with about as serious an injury as can happen...didn't even want to see the new playbook!
It doesn't look to me like he'll ever have the power nor confidence he once did.

Lucky we got what we did for them!

vikingivan
06-16-2007, 11:08 AM
"sleepagent" wrote:


As funny as it might sound . . . I think it's still too early to write of the careers of either player.

This year should be really interesting to watch, but I feel MOSS has a much better chance of reviving his career than CULPEPPER does, but either can bounce back in the right situation.


Moss is in the idea situation now, he should be able to bounce back and have a fine season.
I think Pep can bounce back if gets with the right offensive team, such as Linehan and the Rams.
I don't think Pep can play in just any offense.

Purple Floyd
06-16-2007, 11:14 AM
The thing really isn't whether they will be successful in another location, but whether if we had kept them, would they have fit into what the management is trying to do and whether their skills could be fully utilized by the current staff.

Since we are trying to change the character of the team and get away from the player distractions that occurred in the past it is probably best for the players and the team that the moves were done. Now our team can bring in the players with the disposition they want and the players can go find a team that fits their skills.

singersp
06-16-2007, 11:50 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


The thing really isn't whether they will be successful in another location, but whether if we had kept them, would they have fit into what the management is trying to do and whether their skills could be fully utilized by the current staff.

Since we are trying to change the character of the team and get away from the player distractions that occurred in the past it is probably best for the players and the team that the moves were done. Now our team can bring in the players with the disposition they want and the players can go find a team that fits their skills.


I don't think there is a QB out there that can fit into just any offensive scheme. Rather, I think the offensive scheme needs to be taylored to fit what the QB is used to, comfortable with & thrives in.

If that QB or player doesn't fit your scheme & your not willing to adjust the scheme for him, then look elsewhere for one that does. Regardless of how good that player is.

Billy Boy
06-16-2007, 12:00 PM
Regardless of wether or not Moss produces this year they were still right to get rid of him.
They got more for him then the Raiders and he was becoming somewhat malignant.

I could go on and on about how they were right about Culpepper. I would never question that unless he gets his team a superbowl, and that won't happen.

vikingivan
06-16-2007, 12:07 PM
"singersp" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


The thing really isn't whether they will be successful in another location, but whether if we had kept them, would they have fit into what the management is trying to do and whether their skills could be fully utilized by the current staff.

Since we are trying to change the character of the team and get away from the player distractions that occurred in the past it is probably best for the players and the team that the moves were done. Now our team can bring in the players with the disposition they want and the players can go find a team that fits their skills.


I don't think there is a QB out there that can fit into just any offensive scheme. Rather, I think the offensive scheme needs to be taylored to fit what the QB is used to, comfortable with & thrives in.

If that QB or player doesn't fit your scheme & your not willing to adjust the scheme for him, then look elsewhere for one that does. Regardless of how good that player is.


I hope T-Jack fits in Chili's scheme.
Last year was evidence that Chili is not planning on changing his scheme to suit the quarterback.
Or maybe our quarterback was just not talented enough last year.

singersp
06-16-2007, 12:09 PM
"Billy" wrote:


Regardless of wether or not Moss produces this year they were still right to get rid of him.
They got more for him then the Raiders and he was becoming somewhat malignant.

I could go on and on about how they were right about Culpepper. I would never question that unless he gets his team a superbowl.


God I hope that never happens or we'll never hear the end of it from the DC crotch sniffers.

Billy Boy
06-16-2007, 12:11 PM
"singersp" wrote:


"Billy" wrote:


Regardless of wether or not Moss produces this year they were still right to get rid of him.
They got more for him then the Raiders and he was becoming somewhat malignant.

I could go on and on about how they were right about Culpepper. I would never question that unless he gets his team a superbowl.


God I hope that never happens or we'll never hear the end of it from the DC crotch sniffers.


LOL if that happens then God really does hate me.
;D

ejmat
06-16-2007, 12:33 PM
"singersp" wrote:


"Billy" wrote:


Regardless of wether or not Moss produces this year they were still right to get rid of him.
They got more for him then the Raiders and he was becoming somewhat malignant.

I could go on and on about how they were right about Culpepper. I would never question that unless he gets his team a superbowl.


God I hope that never happens or we'll never hear the end of it from the DC crotch sniffers.


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.

As far as Moss goes, I will always miss Moss.
He will contribute in NE.
He may not be the premier player there but he is with a good franchise.
I honestly believe if his team is winning he doesn't cause waves.
If NE starts losing that will be a different story.
I think he will be quite content if the Pats are superbowl contenders.
they have a bunch of good players and all of them seem to be good team players.
The funny thing will be if they do start going down it will prove you do not need stars to win in this league.
They did it for years without any true superstars.
Just good players that can play well with their teammates.

RK.
06-16-2007, 01:12 PM
Getting rid of CP was the right thing to do and actually the only thing that could be done since he basically forced the trade.

Moss's lack of production in Oakland had more to do with the Raiders than Moss.
The Raiders just flat suck as a team these days.
Everyone was hoping to get traded off that team the last couple of years.
The Raiders will be a train wreck until Al Davis dies and the team passes to someone else.
I am still a little pissed off that Red squirrel sucker McComb traded Randy.
He may have lost a step but when you are starting out two steps ahead of everyone else..............you get my meaning.
I think he will have a great year in NE and the Pats are going to be just plain scary on offense.

tb04512
06-16-2007, 03:02 PM
it was a good idea to get rid of pep i think we got a good deal outta him, as for moss i dont think it was such a great idea

HornedHat
06-16-2007, 05:20 PM
Even if unloading Moss and Culpepper were good moves in hindsight, I don't think they could be attributed to being 'smart' moves. I hated losing Moss, especially since I didn't think we got fair value at the time; but, his exit was more circumstance than design. If he hadn't become an embarrasment, in the eyes of team management, he would never have been traded. Culpepper was even less of a planned exit. He engineered that little move. Both of those trades were haphazard deals that had NOTHING to do with brilliance on the part of management.

RK.
06-16-2007, 05:43 PM
"HornedHat" wrote:


If he hadn't become an embarrassment, in the eyes of team management, he would never have been traded.
He was not traded because he was an embarrassment.
He was traded because at the end of the season McCombs was ranting in his office about whose fault it was that we lost.
Moss told him to his face the reason we lost is because he (McCombs) was too cheap to spend the 30 mil in cap we had on a defense instead of pocketing it. Two weeks later cheap ass McCombs traded him for speaking up and telling him the truth.
Everyone was surprised, even Tice, that Moss was traded if you remember.
It was a McCombs deal pure and simple because he didn't like being told what a cheap ass owner he was.


The whole thing still pisses me off.
>:(

HornedHat
06-16-2007, 06:20 PM
Sort of my point. He was an embarrasment to Red. Has nothing to do with right or wrong. Management (McCombs) was embarrased.

VikemanX84
06-16-2007, 08:29 PM
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.

NodakPaul
06-16-2007, 09:13 PM
"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.

singersp
06-16-2007, 09:56 PM
"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.
;)

gregair13
06-17-2007, 12:34 AM
The big problem when culpepper + moss was here was the defense was so bad that these two pretty much had to win the games by themselves. as we all know, without much defense you do not win in this league.

NDVikingFan66
06-17-2007, 01:25 AM
"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

ejmat
06-17-2007, 08:38 AM
"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.

singersp
06-17-2007, 09:03 AM
"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.

ejmat
06-17-2007, 09:49 AM
"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

Vikes_King
06-17-2007, 02:08 PM
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

NDVikingFan66
06-17-2007, 06:12 PM
nothing wrong with picturing serena having sex.....but McKinnie could kill her

Mr Anderson
06-17-2007, 06:36 PM
"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.

VikemanX84
06-17-2007, 06:55 PM
"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....

singersp
06-17-2007, 11:32 PM
Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 10:21 am

Two Trades Revisited (http://www.seahawkshuddle.com/v1/viewtopic.php?p=77092)

-- Dan Dietzel, Minnesota Vikings

NDVikingFan66
06-17-2007, 11:40 PM
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.

singersp
06-17-2007, 11:49 PM
"NDVikingFan66" wrote:


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.


I could deal with some of Moses antics. I still think the fake mooning was great & so did Sharper, but it was the team chemistry thing, including in the locker room, that made up my mind it was time for him to go.

He needed to "grow up" then & I think he still needs to yet.

ejmat
06-18-2007, 07:41 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"NDVikingFan66" wrote:


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.


I could deal with some of Moses antics. I still think the fake mooning was great & so did Sharper, but it was the team chemistry thing, including in the locker room, that made up my mind it was time for him to go.

He needed to "grow up" then & I think he still needs to yet.


I thought the fake moon was awesome.
I too agree he didn't do much for the locker room chemistry although a lot of teammates seemed to like him.
It was the more serious teammates like Birk that had a problem with him.

Singer, name some of the Moses antics.... LOL
:P

singersp
06-18-2007, 07:47 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"NDVikingFan66" wrote:


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.


I could deal with some of Moses antics. I still think the fake mooning was great & so did Sharper, but it was the team chemistry thing, including in the locker room, that made up my mind it was time for him to go.

He needed to "grow up" then & I think he still needs to yet.


I thought the fake moon was awesome.
I too agree he didn't do much for the locker room chemistry although a lot of teammates seemed to like him.
It was the more serious teammates like Birk that had a problem with him.

Singer, name some of the Moses antics.... LOL
:P


Just off the top of my head, while he was still a Viking....

The water bottle incident
The moon
The traffic cop
Walking off the field early
The "I'll play when I want to" mentality

The later two is where he crossed the line as far as I was concerned.

Prophet
06-18-2007, 08:49 AM
I heard rumors on the street this weekend that there will be another NFL HOF located in New Jersey.
It will be called the 'Island of Misfit Vets'.
Sniffers worldwide are rejoicing.

Mr Anderson
06-18-2007, 09:35 AM
"Prophet" wrote:


I heard rumors on the street this weekend that there will be another NFL HOF located in New Jersey.
It will be called the 'Island of Misfit Vets'.
Sniffers worldwide are rejoicing.


Don't be dissing Jersey Prophet.

Marrdro
06-18-2007, 09:48 AM
"VikemanX84" wrote:


"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....
Or what???????....... ::)

NP is right on target here.

Rant On

I was tired of watching a mediocre team being run into the ground by a less that desirable owner who was to cheap to hire a fully manned staff to run the team.

Sure the deep ball to Randy was great for the highlight films but it sure didn't ever get us a team on the field capable of consistently winning games, let alone making it to the playoffs or winning a Superbowl.

Take alook again and you will see what really contributed to a 39-41 record.......

Couldn't win a road game........
Couldn't win on grass......... Lowest paid HC....... Lowest amount of asstant coaches ect ect ect.......

I for one have the patience to have a 6-10 season as well as possibly another rough year to see this program run the way a pro football is supposed to be run.

I think you are seeing evidence of that now what with an infusion of young talent that will be here for the long haul, key vets being signed that are already on the team, a few FA vets signed to fill holes, a huge influx of coaches/scouts and front officer personnel to make sure the right guys are found and signed.
Most importantly
though is the owner.
I think he is here to not only make money off this team but to also make sure the team on the field wins.

Long story short what we have now and what will be here in the near future is alot better than what we have had for the past 5/6 years.

Rant Off

ejmat
06-18-2007, 05:55 PM
"Mr" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


I heard rumors on the street this weekend that there will be another NFL HOF located in New Jersey.
It will be called the 'Island of Misfit Vets'.
Sniffers worldwide are rejoicing.


Don't be dissing Jersey Prophet.


Yeah, watch the Jersey jokes
;D
I'm only sticking up for that cause I was born there.
Haven't lived there in 20 years.

singersp
06-18-2007, 06:02 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


I heard rumors on the street this weekend that there will be another NFL HOF located in New Jersey.
It will be called the 'Island of Misfit Vets'.
Sniffers worldwide are rejoicing.


Don't be dissing Jersey Prophet.


Yeah, watch the Jersey jokes
;D
I'm only sticking up for that cause I was born there.
Haven't lived there in 20 years.


Smart move!
;)




:D

Mr Anderson
06-18-2007, 06:09 PM
"singersp" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


I heard rumors on the street this weekend that there will be another NFL HOF located in New Jersey.
It will be called the 'Island of Misfit Vets'.
Sniffers worldwide are rejoicing.


Don't be dissing Jersey Prophet.


Yeah, watch the Jersey jokes
;D
I'm only sticking up for that cause I was born there.
Haven't lived there in 20 years.


Smart move!
;)




:D


New Jersey gets a bad rep for the southern half. Once you get past the Driscoll bridge everything goes down hill, until you get to AC, then it's better, but only on the boardwalk.

North Jersey is great, except for Elizabeth and Newark, anyone who watches the Sopranos can see that.

singersp
06-18-2007, 06:16 PM
"Mr" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


I heard rumors on the street this weekend that there will be another NFL HOF located in New Jersey.
It will be called the 'Island of Misfit Vets'.
Sniffers worldwide are rejoicing.


Don't be dissing Jersey Prophet.


Yeah, watch the Jersey jokes
;D
I'm only sticking up for that cause I was born there.
Haven't lived there in 20 years.


Smart move!
;)




:D


New Jersey gets a bad rep for the southern half. Once you get past the Driscoll bridge everything goes down hill, until you get to AC, then it's better, but only on the boardwalk.

North Jersey is great, except for Elizabeth and Newark, anyone who watches the Sopranos can see that.


LOL! So the only good portion of the southern half of the state is one place, the Boardwalk & the northern half is great except for Newark & Elizabeth, which are bad?

So how much "good" does that leave in the state, compared to the bad?

Sounds like about 25-30%.

Mr Anderson
06-18-2007, 06:45 PM
"singersp" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:




I heard rumors on the street this weekend that there will be another NFL HOF located in New Jersey.
It will be called the 'Island of Misfit Vets'.
Sniffers worldwide are rejoicing.



Don't be dissing Jersey Prophet.


Yeah, watch the Jersey jokes
;D
I'm only sticking up for that cause I was born there.
Haven't lived there in 20 years.


Smart move!
;)




:D


New Jersey gets a bad rep for the southern half. Once you get past the Driscoll bridge everything goes down hill, until you get to AC, then it's better, but only on the boardwalk.

North Jersey is great, except for Elizabeth and Newark, anyone who watches the Sopranos can see that.


LOL! So the only good portion of the southern half of the state is one place, the Boardwalk & the northern half is great except for Newark & Elizabeth, which are bad?

So how much "good" does that leave in the state, compared to the bad?

Sounds like about 25-30%.


Actually most of the population is North and Central. Essex county is the most densely populated areas in the world. NJ has a higher population density than any other state. Southern jersey is very sparsely populated though.

I say everywhere from the driscoll bridge (Except for AC and shore towns) and above
is great(Excluding parts of Newark and Elizabeth).




If we were to have a state civil war and break into Northern and Southern Jersey the northern half would look so much better than the south.


Can anyone from NJ back me up here?(Unless you're from Southern NJ of course, then you obviously will not)

singersp
06-18-2007, 06:52 PM
"Mr" wrote:



If we were to have a state civil war and break into Northern and Southern Jersey the northern half would look so much better than the south.



Sounds like you have a plan to improve the state & rid it of all the riff-raff.

When are you running for congress?
;)

I did hear from a friend of mine who lived in Jersey, that it was a filthy state. He was impressed on how clean Minneapolis/St. Paul was compared to Jersey.

BadlandsVikings
06-18-2007, 07:01 PM
I was on a bus trips to NYC after 9/11 and Jersey made me feel dirty.

Mr Anderson
06-18-2007, 07:14 PM
"singersp" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:



If we were to have a state civil war and break into Northern and Southern Jersey the northern half would look so much better than the south.



Sounds like you have a plan to improve the state & rid it of all the riff-raff.

When are you running for congress?
;)

I did hear from a friend of mine who lived in Jersey, that it was a filthy state. He was impressed on how clean Minneapolis/St. Paul was compared to Jersey.


Do you know where in NJ he lived? I'm going to make some guesses to start.

Elizabeth
Newark
Irvington
Camden
Trenton
Atlantic City
Patterson
Willingboro
Dover
Bayonne
One of the Oranges

Most of these are either small cities, or immediate suburbs of major cities. Once you get out to where I live it's much better.



I love New Jersey, but for all of hte good things there are bad things. Extremely high taxes and we pay very high insurance. Parts are dirty, even though my town is amazing (Westfield), I noticed a difference in air quality when I traveled to South Brunswick NJ for a track meet.

I would love to visit Minnesota, catch a Vikes game. The weather he is pretty good, but I love cold winters and we seem to get a lot of warmth every winter, plus it gets really humid here, and I sweat more than anyone on the planet, so I would like to check out some place in Viking country.

ejmat
06-18-2007, 07:18 PM
I actually just returned from a trip to NJ.
I visited family in northern NJ then went to AC and actually won money there.
Here's my take.
Northern NJ is actually a lot cleaner than what I remember.
Even Newark is cleaner than it was.
There are some verynice parts of NJ.
North Central NJ is actually pretty nice.
You have a lot of older style homes with a lot of grass and trees.
Goint north you have the more industrial areas like Newark and Elizabeth.
I don't know too much about the south.
I used to hangout at Seaside heights alot as a teenager.
In fact I saw Bon Jovi when they were novices.
AC boardwalk is nice but off the boardwalk looks pretty ghetto (please xcuse the term).
I used to love to go to Wildwood but I haven't been there in years so I can't comment on that.

All in all, NJ isn't as bad as I remember it.
It all depends where you go.
But you are right Singer.
It was a great move.

ejmat
06-18-2007, 07:21 PM
"Mr" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:



If we were to have a state civil war and break into Northern and Southern Jersey the northern half would look so much better than the south.



Sounds like you have a plan to improve the state & rid it of all the riff-raff.

When are you running for congress?
;)

I did hear from a friend of mine who lived in Jersey, that it was a filthy state. He was impressed on how clean Minneapolis/St. Paul was compared to Jersey.


Do you know where in NJ he lived? I'm going to make some guesses to start.

Elizabeth
Newark
Irvington
Camden
Trenton
Atlantic City
Patterson
Willingboro
Dover
Bayonne
One of the Oranges

Most of these are either small cities, or immediate suburbs of major cities. Once you get out to where I live it's much better.



I love New Jersey, but for all of hte good things there are bad things. Extremely high taxes and we pay very high insurance. Parts are dirty, even though my town is amazing (Westfield), I noticed a difference in air quality when I traveled to South Brunswick NJ for a track meet.

I would love to visit Minnesota, catch a Vikes game. The weather he is pretty good, but I love cold winters and we seem to get a lot of warmth every winter, plus it gets really humid here, and I sweat more than anyone on the planet, so I would like to check out some place in Viking country.



Westfield?
I lived in Kenilworth most of my time there.
I was born in Morristown.
Westfield was 15 minutes from Kenilworth (although it's probably closer now with all the new highways that are there).

Mr Anderson
06-18-2007, 07:58 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:



If we were to have a state civil war and break into Northern and Southern Jersey the northern half would look so much better than the south.



Sounds like you have a plan to improve the state & rid it of all the riff-raff.

When are you running for congress?
;)

I did hear from a friend of mine who lived in Jersey, that it was a filthy state. He was impressed on how clean Minneapolis/St. Paul was compared to Jersey.


Do you know where in NJ he lived? I'm going to make some guesses to start.

Elizabeth
Newark
Irvington
Camden
Trenton
Atlantic City
Patterson
Willingboro
Dover
Bayonne
One of the Oranges

Most of these are either small cities, or immediate suburbs of major cities. Once you get out to where I live it's much better.



I love New Jersey, but for all of hte good things there are bad things. Extremely high taxes and we pay very high insurance. Parts are dirty, even though my town is amazing (Westfield), I noticed a difference in air quality when I traveled to South Brunswick NJ for a track meet.

I would love to visit Minnesota, catch a Vikes game. The weather he is pretty good, but I love cold winters and we seem to get a lot of warmth every winter, plus it gets really humid here, and I sweat more than anyone on the planet, so I would like to check out some place in Viking country.



Westfield?
I lived in Kenilworth most of my time there.
I was born in Morristown.
Westfield was 15 minutes from Kenilworth (although it's probably closer now with all the new highways that are there).


Yeah I'm only a few minutes from Kenilworth. I go through there coming home from certain places on Route 22.

Did you go to school with Tony Siragusa? I know he is from Kenilworth.

And Seaside Heights is probably the dirtiest beach town there is. Thats where all of us high school kids go to party prom weekend. Wildwood is still alright, I went down there once or twice in the past few years. The nicest beaches are the ones a bit farther north though. Like Spring Lake and Belmar if you know of them.

They've done a lot of work in Newark to clean it up, but it's still for the most part pretty bad.

ejmat
06-18-2007, 09:28 PM
"Mr" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:



If we were to have a state civil war and break into Northern and Southern Jersey the northern half would look so much better than the south.



Sounds like you have a plan to improve the state & rid it of all the riff-raff.

When are you running for congress?
;)

I did hear from a friend of mine who lived in Jersey, that it was a filthy state. He was impressed on how clean Minneapolis/St. Paul was compared to Jersey.


Do you know where in NJ he lived? I'm going to make some guesses to start.

Elizabeth
Newark
Irvington
Camden
Trenton
Atlantic City
Patterson
Willingboro
Dover
Bayonne
One of the Oranges

Most of these are either small cities, or immediate suburbs of major cities. Once you get out to where I live it's much better.



I love New Jersey, but for all of hte good things there are bad things. Extremely high taxes and we pay very high insurance. Parts are dirty, even though my town is amazing (Westfield), I noticed a difference in air quality when I traveled to South Brunswick NJ for a track meet.

I would love to visit Minnesota, catch a Vikes game. The weather he is pretty good, but I love cold winters and we seem to get a lot of warmth every winter, plus it gets really humid here, and I sweat more than anyone on the planet, so I would like to check out some place in Viking country.



Westfield?
I lived in Kenilworth most of my time there.
I was born in Morristown.
Westfield was 15 minutes from Kenilworth (although it's probably closer now with all the new highways that are there).


Yeah I'm only a few minutes from Kenilworth. I go through there coming home from certain places on Route 22.

Did you go to school with Tony Siragusa? I know he is from Kenilworth.

And Seaside Heights is probably the dirtiest beach town there is. Thats where all of us high school kids go to party prom weekend. Wildwood is still alright, I went down there once or twice in the past few years. The nicest beaches are the ones a bit farther north though. Like Spring Lake and Belmar if you know of them.

They've done a lot of work in Newark to clean it up, but it's still for the most part pretty bad.


Yes I did go to school with Goose.
I graduated in 1984 and he graduated in 1985.
We were the same age however and on every baseball and football team together through high school.
I never saw a 12 year old hit a ball as far as he did.
As a 3rd grader he kicked a 6th graders butt.
It was pretty funny.
He's a good guy if he is your friend but wasn't nice to know as his enemy.
Luckily I was a friend.