KFFL tidbits on OL depth, WR progression, and backup QB. [Archive]

Dolla Bill

05-27-2006, 08:52 AM

What I find to be more disheartening is Collins being backup QB.

Redskins | Woodard should compete for roster spot
Fri, 26 May 2006 22:00:39 -0700

Paul Woody, writing for the Sporting News, reports Washington Redskins OT Jonta Woodard should make a run at winning a roster spot and becoming a backup at both tackle positions. The aggressive offensive tactics with the Canadian Football League have helped Woodward refine his footwork and become more mobile. He is rugged enough to play right tackle and agile enough to play left tackle. Woodward will need to show progress during the team's OTAs and then push forward in training camp.

Redskins | Lloyd picking up offense quickly
Fri, 26 May 2006 22:00:26 -0700

Paul Woody, writing for the Sporting News, reports Washington Redskins WR Brandon Lloyd is getting a grasp of the offense very quickly. He has shown explosive ability off the line and has been getting open deep and making plays. He should only get better as he becomes more familiar with what the system has to offer in terms of pass routes.

Redskins | Randle El picking up offense quickly
Fri, 26 May 2006 21:59:42 -0700

Paul Woody, writing for the Sporting News, reports Washington Redskins WR Antwaan Randle El is getting a grasp of the offense very quickly. He has shown explosive ability off the line and has been getting open deep and making plays. He should only get better as he becomes more familiar with what the system has to offer in terms of pass routes.

Redskins | Moss picking up offense quickly
Fri, 26 May 2006 21:59:28 -0700

Paul Woody, writing for the Sporting News, reports Washington Redskins WR Santana Moss is getting a grasp of the offense very quickly. He has shown explosive ability off the line and has been getting open deep and making plays. He should only get better as he becomes more familiar with what the system has to offer in terms of pass routes.

Redskins | Collins could earn backup job to Brunell
Fri, 26 May 2006 21:50:34 -0700

Paul Woody, writing for the Sporting News, reports Washington Redskins QB Todd Collins could establish himself as QB Mark Brunell's backup. Collins has shown a high comfort level with the offense so far in offseason workouts.

SpicyMcHaggis

05-27-2006, 08:59 AM

I really don't know if I am glad to have read this..that last one worries me a little...

FanFromArizona

05-27-2006, 09:03 AM

koepke25

05-27-2006, 09:33 AM

Come on, let's be serious now.

Did you honestly expect Campbell to be ahead of Collins at THIS point....he is a rookie, learning the nuances of the NFL, and learning the system and he is being compared to a veteran?

Don't read too much into it, get concerned when we get to offseason games if Collins gets more playing time than Campbell. It's not going to happen, trust me. Worry when THAT happens and worry less about the writings of a mediot this early in the offseason.
Yes I did expect Campbell to be ahead of Collins and for that matter Brunell! If Collins is #2 on the depth chart, we made a serious mistake trading up for Campbell. I'm am tired of all this talk about rookie QB's and 2nd year QB's not being able to go out and win games........ Do the names Tom Brady & Ben Roethlisberger ring a bell. If Campbell is to be our QB of the future, he needs to step up and win the starting job this preseason!

LuvSkins17

05-27-2006, 09:37 AM

Im not worried about this read. I would expect Collins to digest an offense that he has been learning for the past 4 years. This only makes things better for Campbell as far as his learning goes,.... and he is right handed. We will be ok.

shally

05-27-2006, 09:49 AM

What I find to be more disheartening is Collins being backup QB.

although i like kffl.com, i would not put that much stock in the collins comments-- of course he will look good now because he has a high degree of familiarity with the offense. that is why he was brought in.

i would not draw negative conclusions about campbell right now..

shally

05-27-2006, 09:51 AM

FanFromArizona

05-27-2006, 09:54 AM

redskinz#1fan

05-27-2006, 10:04 AM

Yes I did expect Campbell to be ahead of Collins and for that matter Brunell! If Collins is #2 on the depth chart, we made a serious mistake trading up for Campbell. I'm am tired of all this talk about rookie QB's and 2nd year QB's not being able to go out and win games........ Do the names Tom Brady & Ben Roethlisberger ring a bell. If Campbell is to be our QB of the future, he needs to step up and win the starting job this preseason!

I'm probably the biggest Campbell supporter that there is, but your not looking at this with clear vision. First of all the 2 names that you threw out there, are names of guys that have abnormal success stories. What happen with them doesn't happen every day, it's like 1 in a million. Secondly, if Campbell doesn't win the starting job by the end of preseason, by no means does that mean he won't be our QB of the future. You are definitely jumping the gun on that one. Collins is suppose to understand the offense better then Campbell, and Brunell for that matter. You must be forget that he has played in this type offense before and with the same coach. That is exactly why he (Collins) was brought in here, to help assist the players with the new offensive system.

Finally like posted in a previous post, it is toooooooo early to be buying into some article about who will be starting or backing up any player, because we haven't even started TC yet. So please just relax!

koepke25

05-27-2006, 11:14 AM

I'm probably the biggest Campbell supporter that there is, but your not looking at this with clear vision. First of all the 2 names that you threw out there, are names of guys that have abnormal success stories. What happen with them doesn't happen every day, it's like 1 in a million. Secondly, if Campbell doesn't win the starting job by the end of preseason, by no means does that mean he won't be our QB of the future. You are definitely jumping the gun on that one. Collins is suppose to understand the offense better then Campbell, and Brunell for that matter. You must be forget that he has played in this type offense before and with the same coach. That is exactly why he (Collins) was brought in here, to help assist the players with the new offensive system.

Finally like posted in a previous post, it is toooooooo early to be buying into some article about who will be starting or backing up any player, because we haven't even started TC yet. So please just relax!
I want to throw some names out there and have you tell me what they all have in common.....

Culpepper
Brady
Vick
P. Manning
E. Manning
McNabb
Leftwich
Roethlisberger

I also want to clarify that I haven't written off JC. If you read my post more carefully you will see that I stated if he is #3 on our depth chart we made a mistake and that if he is our QB of the future he should be able to beat out two Veterans who are one or two birthdays away from collecting their AARP cards.

Do you give up on the answer to the list above.........................

They all had winning records in their 2nd year and all but Leftwich made the playoffs.

I will throw one more name out there for you.... Jeff Garcia, although he hasn't been that great recently let's take a look at what he did his second year in the league....over 4200 yds, 31 TD's and a 97.6 passer rating.

Now that being said, I will take our supporting cast over any one of these teams. So if Campbell is going to lead us to the promise land, let's saddle up and head out now! HTTR!!!!!

Ibleedburgundy

05-27-2006, 11:17 AM

Redskins | Lloyd picking up offense quickly
Fri, 26 May 2006 22:00:26 -0700

Paul Woody, writing for the Sporting News, reports Washington Redskins WR Brandon Lloyd is getting a grasp of the offense very quickly. He has shown explosive ability off the line and has been getting open deep and making plays. He should only get better as he becomes more familiar with what the system has to offer in terms of pass routes.

Redskins | Randle El picking up offense quickly
Fri, 26 May 2006 21:59:42 -0700

Paul Woody, writing for the Sporting News, reports Washington Redskins WR Antwaan Randle El is getting a grasp of the offense very quickly. He has shown explosive ability off the line and has been getting open deep and making plays. He should only get better as he becomes more familiar with what the system has to offer in terms of pass routes.

Redskins | Moss picking up offense quickly
Fri, 26 May 2006 21:59:28 -0700

Paul Woody, writing for the Sporting News, reports Washington Redskins WR Santana Moss is getting a grasp of the offense very quickly. He has shown explosive ability off the line and has been getting open deep and making plays. He should only get better as he becomes more familiar with what the system has to offer in terms of pass routes.

Do they just copy and paste this statement for every receiver in the league?

IowaSkinsFan

05-27-2006, 11:28 AM

He said the exact same thing for each WR.

What I find to be more disheartening is Collins being backup QB.

Because you don't have any confidence in him or because you want to see Campbell win the job?

redskinz#1fan

05-27-2006, 11:32 AM

I want to throw some names out there and have you tell me what they all have in common.....

Culpepper-Looked like a lost kid without Moss
Brady
Vick-Has the throwing accuracy of my blind Grandmother :cool: . He is a RB with a QB's #!
P. Manning
E. Manning-He has been too inconsistent in my eyes to even be mentioned. Tiki carried this team and took a ton of pressure off of him
McNabb-Has talent, but seems to lack the desire to put him over the top. Seems to give up on plays at times.
Leftwich-Just never really impressed me, no real reason
Roethlisberger

I also want to clarify that I haven't written off JC. If you read my post more carefully you will see that I stated if he is #3 on our depth chart we made a mistake and that if he is our QB of the future he should be able to beat out two Veterans who are one or two birthdays away from collecting their AARP cards.

Do you give up on the answer to the list above.........................

They all had winning records in their 2nd year and all but Leftwich made the playoffs.

I will throw one more name out there for you.... Jeff Garcia, although he hasn't been that great recently let's take a look at what he did his second year in the league....over 4200 yds, 31 TD's and a 97.6 passer rating.

Now that being said, I will take our supporting cast over any one of these teams. So if Campbell is going to lead us to the promise land, let's saddle up and head out now! HTTR!!!!!

Outta your list, I would only recognize about 3 of them and 2 possibles. (P. Manning, Big Ben, & Brady-and 2 big ? next to Mcnabb & Leftwich) The rest of the bunch is questionable. I put reasons next to their names.

skinfanjon

05-27-2006, 11:35 AM

I've thought all along that the backup QB would be determined by the situation he was needed for. If it were a brief period of a game or to close out a win or something, I think Collins would be out there, because they probably trust him to avoid turnovers moreso than Campbell right now. If we needed a spark or a lengthy stint from the backup QB, I would expect JC to get the nod, because his upside is bigger. Either way, I could care less about what Paul Woody thinks. It says he writes for Sporting News, but he also writes for the Richmond Times Discharge, unless there are two Paul Woodys. The guy picked the Rams to win the Super Bowl last year.....idiot.

Slobberknocker

05-27-2006, 11:44 AM

I want to throw some names out there and have you tell me what they all have in common.....

Culpepper
Brady
Vick
P. Manning
E. Manning
McNabb
Leftwich
Roethlisberger

They have another thing in common: they didn't/don't have Joe Gibbs as a coach! He's old school and a master at this. Please don't question the man's methods, not until you have 3 Super Bowl trophies and have turned around a moribund franchise, bringing it against unlikely odds back into playoff contention.

I realize the offseason is slow, but c'mon people. We've got JG running the show. Everything will be just fine.

HanburgerBum

05-27-2006, 12:16 PM

Dolla Bill

05-27-2006, 12:18 PM

Because you don't have any confidence in him or because you want to see Campbell win the job?

I want Campbell to win the job without a doubt, as to not stunt his progress mentally as well as physically. I understand Gibbs said that both would fight for the job, but Gibbs does know that if Collins beats him out, then it could lead to one of two things: 1) Campbell works his butt off to get up the depth chart, or 2) he regresses in his learning curve and his confidence.

I really hope for #1, but I want Campbell to win the backup role, and eventually be very good for the skins.

koepke25

05-27-2006, 12:28 PM

Can you name one QB Gibbs has been wrong about? The list includes Theismann (SB wn), Schroder (had a couple of excellent years and fetched the Skins Lachey in a trade), Rypien (SB win), Humphries (had to trade him because Ryp was ahead of him), Williams (SB win), Brunell, Ramsey (got rid of him because he can't play).

Of course, Campbell could be the first QB Gibbs misjudged. But, with his track record, I think I will stick with Gibbs.
So far Brunell hasn't done a whole lot. The rest of the team carried him through last season. The verdict isn't out on Ramsey yet. I love Gibbs, but I don't think we have any chance of winning the SB with Brunell as our QB.

thickskin

05-27-2006, 01:19 PM

i said this months ago in the "campbell to compete for back-up" thread, wherein most were upset he wasn't going to be the starter. i saw him play and heard the week-in/week-out commentary on his performance in bama for his 4 years at the barn. he's never been the cockstrong gunslinger type. he'll be a good puppet qb, the coach's pet, which is great so long as our coaches are awesome, which they are, but he's not your typical vocal leader. he's steady and effective and will fall in line with gibbs' no-costly-mistakes qb paradigm, and when he goes in, he'll be ready. but he's never going to take over games. and as of now, i'm guessing his advantages over collins are the ability to make more throws and move around in and out of the pocket. our coaches don't value organic play and imporvisation over execution, and so long as collins has a significant advantage in compreehnding the offense, which he surely knows like the back of his hand, he'll be the back-up.

thickskin

05-27-2006, 01:24 PM

So far Brunell hasn't done a whole lot. The rest of the team carried him through last season. The verdict isn't out on Ramsey yet. I love Gibbs, but I don't think we have any chance of winning the SB with Brunell as our QB.

i disagree. i think what will hold us back this year is a teamwide incomplete grasp of the offense. next year maybe brunell will limit us. but as of now, for one season, i'd take him over last year's roethlesberger. he's not as mobile, but moves through his options better.

DoGood

05-27-2006, 01:46 PM

Those tidbits are downright hilarious. Not much isn't going right over at Redskins Park.:)

If these guys at WR are already getting into the game, it will mean great things for our passing game.

DoGood

05-27-2006, 01:54 PM

So far Brunell hasn't done a whole lot. The rest of the team carried him through last season. The verdict isn't out on Ramsey yet. I love Gibbs, but I don't think we have any chance of winning the SB with Brunell as our QB.

Are these people still around?

Brunell got carried through last season? Having a career year in an offense with 1 competent receiver and was previously ranked 29th in the NFL a year ago means he was as important to the success of our team as either Portis or Moss. He runs the show and leads the offense both on the field and off. How about taking a look at a healthy Brunell that has weapons at his disposal in a system he was made for IMO. He is perfect for a high efficiency offense that Saunders plays. He makes few mistakes, good decisions, and he can make all the throws. Plus he is going to have GREAT chemistry with Santana Moss. They were just wingin' it in 2005.:)

This is ridiculous. Alright, now no more Brunell talk in this thread.

RedskinForLife

05-27-2006, 01:55 PM

I hope that the first three are true because that helps prove that how coaching staff found some good players to put together. The WRs are picking up that offense and we also have a O-linemen that can possible play both guard positions. This off season has been one of the best that I have ever seen from the redskins.

FanFromArizona

05-27-2006, 02:14 PM

How about no more talk about this topic anymore? The talk about who's going to be backup QB is stupid to discuss at this point. I am not weighing in anymore on this thread. Its.simply.stupid.

HanburgerBum

05-27-2006, 02:28 PM

So far Brunell hasn't done a whole lot. The rest of the team carried him through last season. The verdict isn't out on Ramsey yet. I love Gibbs, but I don't think we have any chance of winning the SB with Brunell as our QB.

Brunell hasn't done a whole lot, and the verdict isn't in on Ramsey yet. With all due respect, you must be joking. Or, you should be passing around whatever it is you are smoking.

Mark was a heavy contributor in a playoff season in 2005, despite the fact that everyone (except for Gibbs) in Washington had written him off. He made some incredible plays in the first Dallas game that showed the Skins can indeed win NFC East games. He guided the Skins thru the last 5 regular season games to make the playoffs. Statistically, he had a career season last year. True, he wasn't as effective in the playoffs when he got dinged. But, most QBs are not in the same situation.

The jury is still out on Ramsey? Just exactly what more do you want to see? Patrick has a cannon arm, but almost nothing else. He is very slow to read defenses and makes a ton of bad decisions, no pocket presence, can't get away from a pass rush, not very good touch, averages about 2 picks a game, puts the ball on the ground every other time he is sacked. I think you will find that he is going to be 3rd string with the Jets this season, behind Pennington and the rookie Clemens.

redskinz#1fan

05-27-2006, 02:33 PM

So far Brunell hasn't done a whole lot. The rest of the team carried him through last season. The verdict isn't out on Ramsey yet. I love Gibbs, but I don't think we have any chance of winning the SB with Brunell as our QB.

I guess that the team was carrying him when he had probably the 2 biggest runs of our season? I'm sure you know what game I'm talking about........DALLAS! If "Mr. Carried" didn't make those 2 big runs and throw 2 BEAUTIFUL TD PASSES to Mr. Moss, then we probably wouldn't have seen our team play in the post season.

And what is this about the verdict still being out on Ramsey? What verdict are you referring to? You must be talking about the verdict as to whether or not Spurrier should be given lethal injection for the murder of Patrick's career. Or hell you could just ask Mr. Ramsey himself about why he couldn't take advantage of the numerous times he was put in the drivers seat. Hell maybe he just wasn't meant to be a driver, but he sure looks like he is comfortable in the passenger seat!

At what point in the season will you start to believe in Brunell? Don't answer that, just wait until about halfway through the season. That will probably be the best time to apologize!

redskinz#1fan

05-27-2006, 02:37 PM

Brunell hasn't done a whole lot, and the verdict isn't in on Ramsey yet. With all due respect, you must be joking. Or, you should be passing around whatever it is you are smoking.

Your gettin your flow on! Your poet and didn't know it!:)

skins111111

05-27-2006, 03:07 PM

good artical but I found it kind of repetitive:) especially on the WRs ha ha

I am a big JC fan and I believe he is our future and maybe the only QB to ever win 2 SBs with Gibbs......I believe he is ranked just where he should be (if he was 2nd it wouldn't say much for Collins) Preseason will tell the tale, Gibbs already stated that JC would get the lions share of the snaps and I will be disapointed if he isn't moved to 2nd on the debth chart after thoes 4 games, I also would not be supprised if he was our starter at the start of regular season or just a few games into the regular season. Even if he dosn't start untill next year it will only mean that our other QBs are doing well.

Red Bear

05-27-2006, 03:10 PM

i dont get how some of you are turning what i see as a positive comment about collins into negative comments about brunell or campbell. *shakes head*

whitskins

05-27-2006, 03:26 PM

Collins has been in Saunders' offense for years, Campbell has been in it for about two weeks. Does anyone really expect Campbell to have won the backup job yet? There's no point in getting bent out of shape about a blurb on our QBs two weeks into OTAs.

Smurf85

05-27-2006, 05:40 PM

Well was happy until the last one.Looks like we will be taking a QB in a couple of years.:banghead:I did expect him to be number 2 and he better be or we are in trouble at the QB postion.:cry:

thickskin

05-27-2006, 07:13 PM

Well was happy until the last one.Looks like we will be taking a QB in a couple of years.:banghead:I did expect him to be number 2 and he better be or we are in trouble at the QB postion.:cry:

with gibbs' love of competition and depth at the position, i imagine we'll be doing that regardless of campbell's success.

skins111111

05-27-2006, 07:42 PM

Well was happy until the last one.Looks like we will be taking a QB in a couple of years.:banghead:I did expect him to be number 2 and he better be or we are in trouble at the QB postion.:

he will have to earn #2 and i expect that to happen by he end of preseason.
Brunell and Collins would both do great in this system with the weapons we have.......but I think JC will be special:)

DoGood

05-28-2006, 12:29 AM

This doesn't surprise me. Collins is the guy showing both Brunell and Campbell how to do this offense. Talent will rule out when we get closer to game time. Campbell will feel awful refreshed I bet. However, all he has seen so far is practice so some transition has to be made. Gibbs is on top of this.

bgforever

05-28-2006, 12:38 AM

Come on, let's be serious now.

Did you honestly expect Campbell to be ahead of Collins at THIS point....he is a rookie, learning the nuances of the NFL, and learning the system and he is being compared to a veteran?

Don't read too much into it, get concerned when we get to offseason games if Collins gets more playing time than Campbell. It's not going to happen, trust me. Worry when THAT happens and worry less about the writings of a mediot this early in the offseason.

Good view also by me. Campbell will only benefit more, with the bar set higher, because of Collins natural familirization. I once recall how Shroeder knew Gibbs offense better than Ryp for a spell, but it was Ryp's "abilities" with growing that soon overtook Shroeder. Also, Collins would have trouble adjusting IMMEDIATELY to a Gibbs old school based offense, whereas Campbell already is familiar with it. There's balance to this.

X-Factor13

05-28-2006, 02:40 AM

So far Brunell hasn't done a whole lot. The rest of the team carried him through last season. The verdict isn't out on Ramsey yet. I love Gibbs, but I don't think we have any chance of winning the SB with Brunell as our QB.

i'm sorry... this is ridiculous. Everything you've mentioned in this thread has been way off base. it doesn't matter how long it takes a qb to be successful, so long as he is successful. what if brunell is great for 3 more years? what are we going to do? we'll let campbell sit. Rich gannon won league MVP in his late 30's and also had a superbowl appearance. and before that he was a long time backup for the chiefs! And who did they have at OC? the same guy we have here.

how can a draft pick be deemed a failure when he hasn't even gotten the chance to prove himself? and that list of qb's, did you know what else most of them had in common? most of them sat a year before they played. The reason they got to play the second year is because they weren't behind already good qb's like brunell. michael vick sat behind chris chandler for a year before he got to start!

the point here is that it really doesn't matter if he's two or three on the depth chart, because he has time. collins has been in this offense FOREVER and knows every nook and cranny that every play has to offer, so why not let him be ahead of him for now? it makes sense.

BurnEm 26

05-28-2006, 02:43 AM

Campbell is the better talent but the playbook would be reduced. Collins simply gives Saunders more playbook to work with. Campbell will be ready sometime this season but I think it'll be around the second half. I'm curious to see if Collins commands this offense better than Brunnel in the preseason. We all didnt think there was any way Brunnel would get the starting nod over Ram before the preseason started. Just throwing that out there...OK, you can bash me now.
I hope Campbell picks up the offense quick. Looks like he's giving it his best.

DefenseWins

05-28-2006, 09:57 AM

Well was happy until the last one.Looks like we will be taking a QB in a couple of years.:banghead:I did expect him to be number 2 and he better be or we are in trouble at the QB postion.

Why get bent out of shape about what gibbs says is an open competion at #2 QB (and #2 WR for that matter, B-lloyds gonna win that tho)

He said he was starting Ramsey last year, look at how that panned out, he'll do the best thing available.

Now, for those of you bashing JC I want to reiiterate a few things. #1 JC was the FIRST quaterback EVER drafted in the first day of the draft by a Gibb's Front office. That should say something. #2 the two QB's drafted ahead of JC and Clevland's Charlie Frye are now considered "misjudgements" by insiders at their respective camps.... while all last year scouts reported JC looked the BEST out of Brunell Ramsey and himself.

JC has learned 4 different offenses during his college career yet still managed to get SEC player of the year in his Junior and Senior seasons.... not to mention MVP of every bowl game he started - that sounds like a bit more than justs "managing a game" to me...

He has a gun of an arm, yes its not Farve, Vick or Ramsey, but it is just the rung below... plus it is widely accepted that his frame was not done developing at the time he was drafted. It was the "accuracy" on the deep ball that was questioned never his strength of getting it there. Not to mention he ran a 4.58 40 yard dash for the redskins, a full tenth of a second better than his combine number....

just something to think about (The More You Know!)

akhhorus

05-28-2006, 10:15 AM

JC has learned 4 different offenses during his college career yet still managed to get SEC player of the year in his Junior and Senior seasons....

No, this is incorrect. Eli Manning was player of the year in Campbell's junior year. Campbell didn't have the best junior year.

GoDannyBoy

05-28-2006, 10:20 AM

Who cares who plays QB just as long as we have a good one. I am happy with our QB situation and if Campbell sits another year so what.

We sign him to a long term deal and don't have to worry who are QB is like the Jets have for several years. And maybe a couple more.

With PRam and LaVar gone there is nothing to complain about. Esp our QBs.

DefenseWins

05-28-2006, 10:21 AM

No, this is incorrect. Eli Manning was player of the year in Campbell's junior year. Campbell didn't have the best junior year.

Oh okie :)

I'll still take that though. We all know why he won it... stupid manning name ;)

Anyway I think if he played at a USC or Ohio State or Michigan he would have been given more respect. That whole damn Auburn team was given very little respect. Man those running backs were good. They reminded me of a harder hitting version of this past years USC team.

akhhorus

05-28-2006, 10:30 AM

I want to throw some names out there and have you tell me what they all have in common.....

Culpepper
Brady
Vick
P. Manning
E. Manning
McNabb
Leftwich
Roethlisberger

I also want to clarify that I haven't written off JC. If you read my post more carefully you will see that I stated if he is #3 on our depth chart we made a mistake and that if he is our QB of the future he should be able to beat out two Veterans who are one or two birthdays away from collecting their AARP cards.

Do you give up on the answer to the list above.........................

They all had winning records in their 2nd year and all but Leftwich made the playoffs.

I will throw one more name out there for you.... Jeff Garcia, although he hasn't been that great recently let's take a look at what he did his second year in the league....over 4200 yds, 31 TD's and a 97.6 passer rating.

Now that being said, I will take our supporting cast over any one of these teams. So if Campbell is going to lead us to the promise land, let's saddle up and head out now! HTTR!!!!!

You need to really clarify your list there. Culpepper and Brady barely played in their rookie years, while everyone else made plenty of starts their rookie year. Leftwich, Big Ben and Peyton were good from their rookie year(Brunell blew out his elbow Leftwich's rookie year). Campbell didn't play one snap last year, so its not fair to point to any play this year and say that he's behind the players on that list. Garcia really doesn't belong in your comparison since he played 5-6 years in the CFL before heading to the NFL. I have another list for you:

Chad Pennington
Matt Hasselbeck
Mark Brunell
Trent Green
Marc Bulger
Brad Johnson
Chris Simms
Steve McNair

All them didn't do much(if anything) until their 3rd year. Thats a pretty good list also.

akhhorus

05-28-2006, 10:34 AM

Oh okie :)

I'll still take that though. We all know why he won it... stupid manning name ;)

You're joking right? Manning was unbelievable in 2003(3600+ yards, 29 TDs and 10 INTs and 10 wins with no talent around him). He won the Maxwell Award(nation's top player) in 2003. Campbell struggled in 2003.

Anyway I think if he played at a USC or Ohio State or Michigan he would have been given more respect. That whole damn Auburn team was given very little respect. Man those running backs were good. They reminded me of a harder hitting version of this past years USC team.

I disagree with that. Auburn was a scary team in 2004. Whether it was because of Brown and Williams or Campbell's development is an academic debate. Everyone in the south knew how good they were.

DefenseWins

05-28-2006, 11:19 AM

You're joking right? Manning was unbelievable in 2003(3600+ yards, 29 TDs and 10 INTs and 10 wins with no talent around him). He won the Maxwell Award(nation's top player) in 2003. Campbell struggled in 2003.

I disagree with that. Auburn was a scary team in 2004. Whether it was because of Brown and Williams or Campbell's development is an academic debate. Everyone in the south knew how good they were.

Yes... Joking... hence the emoticon with the smirking winking eye...

And the South makes up how much of the united states? Yeah... thats what I thought....

anyway :)

CarMike

05-28-2006, 11:32 AM

colkurtz

05-28-2006, 11:54 AM

Collins has 4 years of learning Al Saunders complicated offensive schemes. That's why he is #2 BEFORE TC or the pre-season. Nothing more to read into this information.

Jason Campbell will get a great deal of play time this pre-season. If he doesn't get at least 2 quarters of play (on average) per game, I'll be surprised. Then we'll see how he progresses; and whether he can move up.

Brunell had a damn good season last year. He was just short of a Pro Bowl season, with just one excellent WR for most of the season. You don't have a season like that by being "carried".

Ramsey is a sub-70 QB rating QB, who looks destined to hold a clipboard for his career. If he was so good, why is he third on the depth chart for the Jets?

thickskin

05-28-2006, 12:31 PM

Yes... Joking... hence the emoticon with the smirking winking eye...

And the South makes up how much of the united states? Yeah... thats what I thought....

anyway :)

geographically? maybe a quarter. but in football geography, which is germane, more like 75%. but i agree with you re auburn being disrespected in their undefeated season, if you mean that they didn't get a share of the title handed to them like usc did the previous year. the reason for this, as i see it, has a few facets: usc being the only powerhouse on the heavily media-ed and populated west coast, and auburn disappointing the previous year after being preseaqson #1 in some polls.

thickskin

05-28-2006, 12:47 PM

Why get bent out of shape about what gibbs says is an open competion at #2 QB (and #2 WR for that matter, B-lloyds gonna win that tho)

He said he was starting Ramsey last year, look at how that panned out, he'll do the best thing available.

Now, for those of you bashing JC I want to reiiterate a few things. #1 JC was the FIRST quaterback EVER drafted in the first day of the draft by a Gibb's Front office. That should say something. #2 the two QB's drafted ahead of JC and Clevland's Charlie Frye are now considered "misjudgements" by insiders at their respective camps.... while all last year scouts reported JC looked the BEST out of Brunell Ramsey and himself.

JC has learned 4 different offenses during his college career yet still managed to get SEC player of the year in his Junior and Senior seasons.... not to mention MVP of every bowl game he started - that sounds like a bit more than justs "managing a game" to me...

He has a gun of an arm, yes its not Farve, Vick or Ramsey, but it is just the rung below... plus it is widely accepted that his frame was not done developing at the time he was drafted. It was the "accuracy" on the deep ball that was questioned never his strength of getting it there. Not to mention he ran a 4.58 40 yard dash for the redskins, a full tenth of a second better than his combine number....

just something to think about (The More You Know!)

this has been discussed at length in other threads you can probably search for. i'm on the skeptical wagon. and not bc i'm a barn-hating bama fan (i'd've been excited to pick up brown or lac) but bc jc never impressed me in college. undeniably, he had success, but i attribute it more to the weapons he had around him on both sides of the ball. i hope i'm wrong and he turns out to be a superstar, but even if i'm not, i have every confidence that he can be a very effective game manager, which seems to be gibbs' preference anyway. it would be nice if he was ready this season, and as you say, his experience learning new systems may help out in this regard, but it's imperative he be ready by next year. i think we can all agree there.

akhhorus

05-28-2006, 12:58 PM

Yes... Joking... hence the emoticon with the smirking winking eye...

Its hard to tell when you make such a blatently bad error in fact like you did when you said that Campbell was SEC player of the year in 2003 over Manning, who had one of the best seasons ever for an SEC Qb(and was the #1 overall pick). It makes me wonder if you actually have ever watched college football.

And the South makes up how much of the united states? Yeah... thats what I thought....

anyway :)

In the world of College football, it is the heartland. In the country, it makes up a large amount of the population and land area(Maryland, Kentucky, Arkansas and parts south plus Texas). And if you didn't hear about Auburn much in 2004 until late in the season, you weren't a college football fan.

I know you're new here, but you might want to change your attitude towards members here. This isn't some smack talking board where you can act like a tool towards your fellow members.

DefenseWins

05-28-2006, 01:54 PM

Its hard to tell when you make such a blatently bad error in fact like you did when you said that Campbell was SEC player of the year in 2003 over Manning, who had one of the best seasons ever for an SEC Qb(and was the #1 overall pick). It makes me wonder if you actually have ever watched college football.

In the world of College football, it is the heartland. In the country, it makes up a large amount of the population and land area(Maryland, Kentucky, Arkansas and parts south plus Texas). And if you didn't hear about Auburn much in 2004 until late in the season, you weren't a college football fan.

I know you're new here, but you might want to change your attitude towards members here. This isn't some smack talking board where you can act like a tool towards your fellow members.

Yeah I quickly typed his awards off of his Bio on the NFL Prospect site.

As far as sarcasm.... I always thought the smiley face lent a good natured bend to it. Excuse me, I will remember the seriousness with which you take my errors. No smack was intedend to be talked.

As far as the south being College football's heartland... I very well may agree, some of the best players come from there consistently. There is a lot of foot ball to be watched in college, and I think it is unfair to tell someone who only watched Auburn when they could because they live on the West coast, or the games were often on at the same time as their alma-matter. Auburn is by no means the heralded football factory in the likes of Florida, Florida State, Miami... though their penchant for blockbuster runningbacks is well noted. There are many who considered Auburn a fluke with extremely bad coaching until 2004.

BTW, am I wrong about JC being the MVP of the bowl game Auburn was in 2003? Thats what I misread when I typed the other.

Do you think JC or Matt Leinart had it easier in college due to their surrounding talent? Something I've always wondered. Hard comparison since the established USC offensive system is a far cry from from the yearly change at Auburn.

akhhorus

05-28-2006, 02:05 PM

Yeah I quickly typed his awards off of his Bio on the NFL Prospect site.

As far as sarcasm.... I always thought the smiley face lent a good natured bend to it. Excuse me, I will remember the seriousness with which you take my errors. No smack was intedend to be talked.

I'm not talking about that.

As far as the south being College football's heartland... I very well may agree, some of the best players come from there consistently. There is a lot of foot ball to be watched in college, and I think it is unfair to tell someone who only watched Auburn when they could because they live on the West coast, or the games were often on at the same time as their alma-matter.

Auburn played in many national games, especially in 2004. I don't buy the west coast excuse since they can still see the majority of the games without much problem and as for the alma issue, unless they went to another SEC west team or live in an SEC area, they wouldn't have that many conflicts(especially with the 2004 season).

Auburn is by no means the heralded football factory in the likes of Florida, Florida State, Miami... though their penchant for blockbuster runningbacks is well noted. There are many who considered Auburn a fluke with extremely bad coaching until 2004.

They were a solid 2nd tier program that got hamstrung by the death penalty they were under in the early 1990s.

BTW, am I wrong about JC being the MVP of the bowl game Auburn was in 2003? Thats what I misread when I typed the other.

No.

Do you think JC or Matt Leinart had it easier in college due to their surrounding talent? Something I've always wondered. Hard comparison since the established USC offensive system is a far cry from from the yearly change at Auburn.

This has been discussed before, but Leinart had plenty of talent around him, but he also had basically two sets of talent(Williams, Colbert, Dennis and an almost completely different Oline[Winston Justice was the only same starter I believe in 2003 and 2005, he was suspended in 2004] vs Bush, White, Smith, Jarrett) around him that transitioned while he was there and they didn't miss a beat with Leinart at Qb.

DefenseWins

05-28-2006, 02:14 PM

This has been discussed before, but Leinart had plenty of talent around him, but he also had basically two sets of talent(Williams, Colbert, Dennis and an almost completely different Oline[Winston Justice was the only same starter I believe in 2003 and 2005, he was suspended in 2004] vs Bush, White, Smith, Jarrett) around him that transitioned while he was there and they didn't miss a beat with Leinart at Qb.

Yeah I just meant for the 2004 season... though I guess the whole arguement falls apart right there. Winston Justice is gonna be good me thinx... I never really understood the character issues raised against him... seemed rather minor when compared to choir boys like Pacman Jones

skinfan08

05-29-2006, 04:49 PM

I got a dumb question how would you describe our offense? (spread, west coast,etc.......)

shally

05-29-2006, 05:42 PM

I got a dumb question how would you describe our offense? (spread, west coast,etc.......)

coryell inspired...saunders refined...somewhere they all seem to go back to the sid gilman tree trunk..

redskin_rich

05-29-2006, 09:06 PM

I got a dumb question how would you describe our offense? (spread, west coast,etc.......)
It is a variance of the Gilman/Coryell offense.
Under Gibbs it was, power running, play action passing with various looks disguising the same or similar plays. Pass protection is favored over multiple receivers and this is a timing offense, so everyone has to execute their job as it is scripted, no room for improvisation once the ball is snapped.
This system can be very aggressive and can be conservative, all depending on what the defense is doing.

Now under Saunders, there are some minor differences, though the philosophy remains the same, as he and Gibbs shared the same mentor.
The most noticeable change will be in the formation. Saunders uses a 2 back set where Gibbs used the 1 back as the standard formation. So now we have a FB instead of the H-Back and we look more like a West Coast style but other than the possibilities that we will use more RB screens and the TE will be more of a receiver than blocker, that is where the resemblance to the WCO ends.
It will still be a power running attack and vertical passing game, whereas the WCO utilizes short slants, crossing routes(picks) and traps and draws on running plays.
This will be fun to watch and we have the personnel to operate at a high level.
As to what to call it-- call it the Redskins Offense!

SimplyZ

05-29-2006, 09:32 PM

Collins has 4 years of learning Al Saunders complicated offensive schemes. That's why he is #2 BEFORE TC or the pre-season. Nothing more to read into this information.

Thank you

I was hoping someone realized this...Collins already knows the offense...of course he's going to "grasp" it before campbell (or even brunell)

shally

05-30-2006, 08:10 AM

It is a variance of the Gilman/Coryell offense.
Under Gibbs it was, power running, play action passing with various looks disguising the same or similar plays. Pass protection is favored over multiple receivers and this is a timing offense, so everyone has to execute their job as it is scripted, no room for improvisation once the ball is snapped.
This system can be very aggressive and can be conservative, all depending on what the defense is doing.

Now under Saunders, there are some minor differences, though the philosophy remains the same, as he and Gibbs shared the same mentor.
The most noticeable change will be in the formation. Saunders uses a 2 back set where Gibbs used the 1 back as the standard formation. So now we have a FB instead of the H-Back and we look more like a West Coast style but other than the possibilities that we will use more RB screens and the TE will be more of a receiver than blocker, that is where the resemblance to the WCO ends.
It will still be a power running attack and vertical passing game, whereas the WCO utilizes short slants, crossing routes(picks) and traps and draws on running plays.
This will be fun to watch and we have the personnel to operate at a high level.
As to what to call it-- call it the Redskins Offense!

from what i read, i think that saunders relies more on timing inthe pass patterns, where as gibbs seemed to focus on misdirection and disguise..
i know gibbs used to use multiple plays early in a game to set up a specific play late in the game that was a deeper variation of the first play.. i do not know if saunders relied on that as much... supposedly saunders never liked to run exactly the same play again, whereas gibbs used to enjoy hammering the defense with the same play until they could prove they could stop it-- and that is classically lombardi in approach..

what was interesting to me was that despite the intricacies of saunders offenses inthe passing game, they still rolled up massive yardage inthe running game..

it should be exciting to watch.. isn't it time for training camp to begin already ??
:lol1:

SpicyMcHaggis

05-30-2006, 08:17 AM

from what i read, i think that saunders relies more on timing inthe pass patterns, where as gibbs seemed to focus on misdirection and disguise..
i know gibbs used to use multiple plays early in a game to set up a specific play late in the game that was a deeper variation of the first play.. i do not know if saunders relied on that as much... supposedly saunders never liked to run exactly the same play again, whereas gibbs used to enjoy hammering the defense with the same play until they could prove they could stop it-- and that is classically lombardi in approach..

what was interesting to me was that despite the intricacies of saunders offenses inthe passing game, they still rolled up massive yardage inthe running game..

it should be exciting to watch.. isn't it time for training camp to begin already ??
:lol1:
I wish...man thank god the World Cup begins in a little while because the NFL is just DEAD this time of year...

shally

05-30-2006, 08:19 AM

I wish...man thank god the World Cup begins in a little while because the NFL is just DEAD this time of year...

world cup ??? WORLD CUP ??? what kind of sissy sport is that...
:lol1: :lol1:

SpicyMcHaggis

05-30-2006, 08:25 AM

world cup ??? WORLD CUP ??? what kind of sissy sport is that...
:lol1:
Would you rather watch a few world cup games or engage in 500-post threads on Jesse Lumsden, Patrick Ramsey, or LaVar's weight? :sleep:
(and I am Italian after all....)

shally

05-30-2006, 08:28 AM

Would you rather watch a few world cup games or engage in 500-post threads on Jesse Lumsden, Patrick Ramsey, or LaVar's weight? :sleep:
(and I am Italian after all....)

uhhh.. given the large number of posts that i have put up recently, you might have a clue as to my preferences...

FOOTBALL first and always..

just kidding... about the nature of the world cup..

SkinsKY

05-30-2006, 09:02 AM

:eek:

You and me both brother. That's why I avoid most offseason football threads.

CNYSkinFan

05-30-2006, 09:21 AM

Would you rather watch a few world cup games or engage in 500-post threads on Jesse Lumsden, Patrick Ramsey, or LaVar's weight? :sleep:
(and I am Italian after all....)

There he is AGAIN!!!!!!!!!

Red Bear

05-30-2006, 10:50 AM

There he is AGAIN!!!!!!!!!

scouts.com also did a recent write up on lumsden, its a pay article tho

CNYSkinFan

05-30-2006, 10:52 AM

scouts.com also did a recent write up on lumsden, its a pay article tho
yeah I read that...i was considering positing about it but I am going on a no Jesse Lumsden diet.

smoak

05-30-2006, 11:17 AM

yeah I read that...i was considering positing about it but I am going on a no Jesse Lumsden diet.

Yuck! That sounds a lot like thw water and rice cake diet I tried once. Nasty.

CNYSkinFan

05-30-2006, 11:25 AM

Yuck! That sounds a lot like thw water and rice cake diet I tried once. Nasty.
It's all marshmallow fluff. Looks good at first but then you realize there is no substance.

HanburgerBum

05-30-2006, 01:22 PM

Would you rather watch a few world cup games or engage in 500-post threads on Jesse Lumsden, Patrick Ramsey, or LaVar's weight? :sleep:
(and I am Italian after all....)

Give me 500-post threads on Jesse Lumsden, Patrick Ramsey or Lavar's weight any time. Soccer is a fun game to play (I did that when I was a kid growing up in the Orient), but it is basically unwatchable. That's why even after more than 20 years of MLS in this country and after at least one generation of soccer-playing kids have grown up to be potential paying fans, there is still nobody going to the games or watching it on TV. And, I got news for you, it will NEVER be a major sport in this country.

Soccer is like a 1-0 hockey game in slow motion.

redwolf1218

05-30-2006, 10:34 PM

Give me 500-post threads on Jesse Lumsden, Patrick Ramsey or Lavar's weight any time. Soccer is a fun game to play (I did that when I was a kid growing up in the Orient), but it is basically unwatchable. That's why even after more than 20 years of MLS in this country and after at least one generation of soccer-playing kids have grown up to be potential paying fans, there is still nobody going to the games or watching it on TV. And, I got news for you, it will NEVER be a major sport in this country.

Soccer is like a 1-0 hockey game in slow motion.
get rid of the off-sides rule (its like saying you cant have a fast break in basketball or a long bomb on football) and take some tv timeouts. that would fix it.

oldskinfan

05-30-2006, 10:54 PM

Do they just copy and paste this statement for every receiver in the league?

Yea,what up with the xerox text?

SpicyMcHaggis

05-31-2006, 02:17 AM

Give me 500-post threads on Jesse Lumsden, Patrick Ramsey or Lavar's weight any time. Soccer is a fun game to play (I did that when I was a kid growing up in the Orient), but it is basically unwatchable. That's why even after more than 20 years of MLS in this country and after at least one generation of soccer-playing kids have grown up to be potential paying fans, there is still nobody going to the games or watching it on TV. And, I got news for you, it will NEVER be a major sport in this country.

Soccer is like a 1-0 hockey game in slow motion.
True, at least until the clubs are allowed to compete in the UEFA tournaments.

I agree that lots (maybe the majority) of the games are boring to watch, and I admit I have actually fallen asleep once while watching a game in the stadium, but you cannot ignore the fact that the World Cup is the most important sports tournament in the World (by far).

SpicyMcHaggis

05-31-2006, 02:20 AM

get rid of the off-sides rule (its like saying you cant have a fast break in basketball or a long bomb on football) and take some tv timeouts. that would fix it.
Definitely agree with removing the offside rule (but for different reasons), but not on the timeouts (except in Italy where they should make it actual time so everyone would stop trying to waste time..).

HanburgerBum

05-31-2006, 03:39 AM

get rid of the off-sides rule (its like saying you cant have a fast break in basketball or a long bomb on football) and take some tv timeouts. that would fix it.

I don't think there is anything that can be done to fix soccer. If they get rid of the offside rule, wouldn't teams tend to just hang back on their side of the field in order to prevent fastbreaks. That would seem to make it worse.

Oh, yeah, there is one way to fix soccer. Allow players to use their hands to pass, catch and run with the ball. And, let's give the ball an oblong shape to make it easier to grip. Let's allow players to hit each other. Oh, that's called football? So, it is.

HanburgerBum

05-31-2006, 03:50 AM

True, at least until the clubs are allowed to compete in the UEFA tournaments.

I agree that lots (maybe the majority) of the games are boring to watch, and I admit I have actually fallen asleep once while watching a game in the stadium, but you cannot ignore the fact that the World Cup is the most important sports tournament in the World (by far).

Yes I most certainly can ignore the fact that a lot of people in the world like soccer. I can't be bound by other people's stupidity. Any great game is defined by balance between offense and defense. You can not have a great game where 1-0 is a typical score.

On top of that, a game is lousy when the players have to use the lesser dexterous extremities (feet) of their bodies instead of the greater dexterous extremeites (hands).

SpicyMcHaggis

05-31-2006, 04:15 AM

Yes I most certainly can ignore the fact that a lot of people in the world like soccer. I can't be bound by other people's stupidity. Any great game is defined by balance between offense and defense. You can not have a great game where 1-0 is a typical score.

On top of that, a game is lousy when the players have to use the lesser dexterous extremities (feet) of their bodies instead of the greater dexterous extremeites (hands).
I don't agree with the first part at all, but the second part is pretty funny...:lol1: (and you might just have a point!)