[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He fumbled a lot, but his fumbles lost stats arent NEARLY as bad and are much more in line with a QB who runs as much as he does.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have any way of proving it, but I suspect that very few of Culpepper's fumbles were the result of open field running. I don't think you can attribute his exceptionally high fumble rate to the fact that he is a scrambler.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know how to refute that. Except to say that, due to his ability to scramble, he held the ball a lot longer than many other QBs, since he was almost never looking to throw the ball away. Which led to more hits and more fumbles. These fumbles ALSO should be discounted because of his running ability.

But yeah he fumbled the center snap a lot too I guess. Which is bad but not nearly as bad as an INT or even a sack.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd love to see a breakdown of QB fumbles, something like: snaps, handoffs, sacks, other. It really is absurd to lump them all together.

Also, I think a fumbled snap has got to be worse than taking a sack. The extra burden of a couple more yards is going to be more than offset by the times the defense recovers the fumbled snap, although the addition of the times a sacked QB fumbles probably makes it pretty close.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree wholeheartedly, and from someone who has watched probably 90% of Culpeppers career games, I'd guess that such a breakdown would not be very favorable to him. It really is a weakspot in the statistics. Especially since all center-exchange fumbles are ALWAYS credited to the QB. Isnt it likely that some centers are worse than others? Why is it impossible for us to know this?