Where will JC end up? [Archive] - hailRedskins.com Fan Board

View Full Version : Where will JC end up?

MadDog97

12-29-2009, 02:48 AM

There has been a lot of question as to who will be the next coach. But we may also assume some new players will be here, especially the QB. JC has demonstrated toughness but may be punch drunk at this point. So who would be interested in him? A month ago I would have said Carolina, but their young QB has been impressive and I hope he replaces Jake for Carolina's sake.

So, who would want Mr. Campbell?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/28/AR2009122801298.html

:thinker:

Grant

12-29-2009, 03:11 AM

Nomad

12-29-2009, 03:28 AM

joethefan

12-29-2009, 04:07 AM

As much as I would want him back, IMO I think he needs to go somewhere new and start over. This organization did not support him with Quality Olineman. They gave him a bunch of old beat up scrubbs that happen to play on the oline. That is not how you support your QB. The franchise certainly didn't treat him as if he was a franchise guy, so they got what they deserved. Jason did his best IMO..yes there were times I was yelling bench him!.. But the kid has madd heart it's just sad that the Organization treated him bad off the field and worse on the field. They know it and they knew it. Everyone of those olineman are 3rd stringers at best on any other team.

If I were Jason, I wouldn't sign anything with this team until they have shown me that they have invested heavily in the Oline. Some people may call that selfish but they aren't the ones out there getting beat up and heads torn off by dlineman due the lack of attention this team paid attention to its oline.

If they come crawling back to Jason, If i were him, I would keep the org at bay until I see that they understand how to protect a QB.

redcayman

12-29-2009, 06:55 AM

If I were Jason, I wouldn't sign anything with this team until they have shown me that they have invested heavily in the Oline. Some people may call that selfish but they aren't the ones out there getting beat up and heads torn off by dlineman due the lack of attention this team paid attention to its oline.

If they come crawling back to Jason, If i were him, I would keep the org at bay until I see that they understand how to protect a QB.

Completely agree. To answer the OP I think a sleeper team might be the Vikings. They have a solid Oline and after last night I can see Farve slinking off into the night. Even if he doesn't retire JC respects Farve and he could learn a good bit from him.

MDBluefinCrab

12-29-2009, 07:01 AM

I could care less where he goes as long as he never wears the Burgundy and Gold ever again.

CarMike

12-29-2009, 07:38 AM

LATrueRedskin

12-29-2009, 08:34 AM

I could see him ending up with the Panthers, Bills, Patriots, Browns, Raiders, Seahawks, or 49ers.

Redskinmayhem

12-29-2009, 08:36 AM

I honestly think we'll sign him to a small contract and keep him here for another 2 years. Will he be the starter? Who knows. I really think that we need to se ewho the coach is before make the final call on Jason.

dogfight6

12-29-2009, 08:49 AM

Moe

12-29-2009, 09:45 AM

A lot of panther fans are scared chitless that he'll end up in Charlotte. Even with Fox and staff being retained one more year.

If not there, maybe St. Louis? :whoknows:

He'll probably be a backup any where but in DC.

I don't buy him coming to Charlotte, especially because Fox is staying. They owe Delhomme another $12+mill guaranteed and it makes more sense for them to hand things over to Moore who has played quite well for them lately and costs them nothing. Campbell would fit their offense well, but the dollars don't make sense.

I could see him fitting in well out in San Francisco.

skin4ever

12-29-2009, 10:06 AM

I could care less where he goes as long as he never wears the Burgundy and Gold ever again.

+1. But to get at least a 3rd rd pick for him would be icing on the cake.

RedskinForLife

12-29-2009, 11:01 AM

+1. But to get at least a 3rd rd pick for him would be icing on the cake.

So you and MDbluefinCrab want to start from scratch? That to me is STUPID. JC and these recievers are developing well together. You are will to throw that all away because this season didn't go as planned. The o-line sucks!!!!! If there was another QB in there like Peyton Manning he would have already been on the IR since week 1. This o-line should not be allowed to play another down in the NFL.

NamVet4

12-29-2009, 11:14 AM

MadDog asked "who would be interested in Jason Campbell"

St. Louis Rams.
Oakland Raiders.
San Francisco 49'ers.
Washington Redskins.

I chose the above in no particular order . . . based on the following:

In my opinion Jason will never be a HOF QB. He can be a good starting QB on the team that understands his strengths and weaknesses. He will need an above average O-line(existing now or being built) and an OC/QB coach who can work on his good skills and make them better and overcome his bad habits.
A plus would be to go to a team with a solid RB and 2 serviceable WR's. 2 years with a Team like that and he may make a post season appearance.

skin4ever

12-29-2009, 11:16 AM

So you and MDbluefinCrab want to start from scratch? That to me is STUPID. JC and these recievers are developing well together. You are will to throw that all away because this season didn't go as planned. The o-line sucks!!!!! If there was another QB in there like Peyton Manning he would have already been on the IR since week 1. This o-line should not be allowed to play another down in the NFL.

JC seemed to be playing from scratch every year hes been here and hes just not that good. Sorry, but the definition of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Or is that insanity. Where is this chemistry u speak of? We have 4 wins, and the teams we beat were some of the worst in the NFL, and we lost to some of the worst teams in the NFL. I agree the Oline sucks too, and i think they all should be gone as well.

skin4ever

12-29-2009, 11:20 AM

akhhorus

12-29-2009, 11:24 AM

skin4ever

12-29-2009, 11:38 AM

Skins-fo-life

12-29-2009, 11:40 AM

I think JC ends up somewhere else as a backup. He def. won't be leaving the leauge yet. Where ever he goes I wish him the best. I don't know who took a worse beating here between him or Ramsey. The guy is tough as nails though. I remember his 1st start against Tampa back in 06 and I have rooted for him ever since. Just kind of sad that more than likely his future won't be here in D.C. However, he has had his chances though. I remember 2 years ago when they would be driving in games late (Tampa 07 and Dallas 07) he threw INT's that cost us the game. I sort of knew then that he probably wouldn't become an elite QB. In those situations you need a guy that will be clutch and I have never gotten that impression from him. Whether it's the system or not I don't think the Skins are the team for him. Strange things happen in the NFL though so for some reason he could still be here next year. This is gonna be an exciting offseason for us Skins Fans.

MDBluefinCrab

12-29-2009, 11:52 AM

So you and MDbluefinCrab want to start from scratch? That to me is STUPID. JC and these recievers are developing well together. You are will to throw that all away because this season didn't go as planned. The o-line sucks!!!!! If there was another QB in there like Peyton Manning he would have already been on the IR since week 1. This o-line should not be allowed to play another down in the NFL.

Yes, start all over again. JC still plays like a rookie so why the hell not draft one (rookie) and play him?
The whole offense needs to be over hauled with the exception of maybe 2 or 3 players. JC still can't read a defense, he's got a slow wind up on his passes and still can't connect on anything over 20 yards. It's in his stats, 70% of his completions are 10 yards and under (dump offs).
Shanny runs a WCO which also requires the QB to think fast and have a quick release. These are the two most important aspect of running a WCO that JC doesn't and will never master.
It's time to start over.

BIGREDSKINSFAN1963

12-29-2009, 12:07 PM

i would be shocked if he was not the redskins starting qb next season cause there is not anybody available bettter than JC is.

FunBunch5

12-29-2009, 12:39 PM

i would be shocked if he was not the redskins starting qb next season cause there is not anybody available bettter than JC is.

IMO a cardboard cut out of Peyton Manning is better than Campbell. My predicition is he will be a back up somewhere else for next year and will probably be out of the league in 2012.

skinfanjon

12-29-2009, 12:46 PM

SkinsGuru77

12-29-2009, 12:51 PM

Just about every team in need of a QB will be after Campbell if the Skins make him available. Just off the top of my head:
San Fran
Buffalo
Cleveland(if Mangina is fired)
Minnesota
Arizona(if Warner retires)
Carolina(maybe)
Seattle
St Louis
Oakland
Denver(maybe)
Miami(maybe)

I completely agree, the trick will be if we tender him at a level of compensation that will drive up his market price. JC can't exist here after this season. Management has treated him like toilet paper and we have beat him up like david carr.

I have heard the argument posted a couple times now that starting over because of Chemistry with the recievers/Offense is why we should keep him and I think that is bunk. They will be modifying there Offense next year under shanahan and we will be hopefully cleaning house of several verterans so as a team we will have to develope a whole new chemistry and direction. Finally JC has never shown the ability in my opinon to lead us to a quality win or put the team on his back and take us somewere. ultimately a winner wins and JC just doesnt do that, he will always fall in the catagory of good potiental or the good but not great quarterback. You win with Greatness and JC is not Greatness. :Peace:

RedskinForLife

12-29-2009, 12:53 PM

Yes, start all over again. JC still plays like a rookie so why the hell not draft one (rookie) and play him?
The whole offense needs to be over hauled with the exception of maybe 2 or 3 players. JC still can't read a defense, he's got a slow wind up on his passes and still can't connect on anything over 20 yards. It's in his stats, 70% of his completions are 10 yards and under (dump offs).
Shanny runs a WCO which also requires the QB to think fast and have a quick release. These are the two most important aspect of running a WCO that JC doesn't and will never master.
It's time to start over.

Then who would you want to get? I dont think there is a QB coming out in the draft that is better then JC. Redskins have not been luck on drafting QBs and also we dont let them develop. I think that there is no one better then JC out there. He could not throw passes over 20 yards or more because of the o-line cant protect for more then three seconds. I just hope that we can get veteran coach and keep JC

SkinsGuru77

12-29-2009, 01:05 PM

Then who would you want to get? I dont think there is a QB coming out in the draft that is better then JC. Redskins have not been luck on drafting QBs and also we dont let them develop. I think that there is no one better then JC out there. He could not throw passes over 20 yards or more because of the o-line cant protect for more then three seconds. I just hope that we can get veteran coach and keep JC

Why keep mediocrity when we know we are rebuilding anyway. All JC does is keep the status quo going, in the long run it does nothing to help us. I would argue go after another veteran QB in free agency on the cheep, maybe draft a QB in the Second Round to groom and sit while we rebuild the O-line and Recievers ALA Aaron Rodgers. We arent winning a super bowl the next 2 years so lets treat this rebuild project accordingly.

BurgundyNGold

12-29-2009, 01:09 PM

Us. Who we gonna use Collins? Breenan just throws he doesn't look where.

Campbell us durable.

He's like a Billy Mays product.

''introducing Jason Campbell! It won't score in the red zone but it will get you there! and get your hopes up!''

''Tackle It! Squash It! Punch him In the Eye!…He'll keep on getting up! Even if you wish he wouldn't! Just to give Your Collins a chance!"
:lol1:

I would say that he can go anywhere with an offensive line that will give him at least 3-4 seconds on every play but he still has deficiencies. He still can't read a blitz. He still does not see the whole field. He still has accuracy issues (even on short passes, sheesh). I think those can be corrected in time, though.

skinsfan36

12-29-2009, 01:42 PM

lol who cares. ill say cleveland with his boy zorn.

SkinsGuru77

12-29-2009, 02:07 PM

lol who cares. ill say cleveland with his boy zorn.

:lol1: Totally, you know I would not be the least bit surprised if he got the OC job with cleveland.

SkinsfaninNJ

12-29-2009, 02:30 PM

I have generally steared clear of JC discussions because he is so polarizing, the thread becomes complete hyperbole.

The truth about Campbell is that he is better than about half the QB's in the league and not as good as the other half. With talent around him, your team can go to the playoffs and maybe win a game. Without talent around him, you have the 2009 Redskins.

I am in favor of moving on because his Redskin career has reached its natural ending, and I am ready to take a shot on a young unknown then stick with what we have despite the fact that Campbell improved again this year just as he has all of his prior years.

Having said that, I have faith in the decisions of Allen/Shanahan so if they bring Campbell back, I am ready to cheer him on.

lorimike

12-29-2009, 02:38 PM

If it is an uncapped year he will be a restricted free agent. It is only under these circumstances that he remains. There is no one we are going to be able to get who is better than Jason and I certainly don't want a rookie QB to be fed to the wolves behind this offensive line. Jason needs better protection. But some of his problems are of his own making. He needs to take his time at the line of scrimmage and be able to do some hard counts to figure out where the pressure is coming from. I see most other teams with competant QB's doing this but never from Jason. With better coaching he would be a better QB.

skinfanjon

12-29-2009, 02:51 PM

akhhorus

12-29-2009, 02:58 PM

Thats a nice list of suitors, let the bidding games begin. We need these picks more than we need JC. Once we tender him a RFA, can we raise the compensation level pending on interest?

Depends on the uncapped year rules.

He'll get some opportunities, but you can cross Minnesota, Denver, and Miami off this list. Favre will be back, I think, Denver already passed last year when they choose Orton and Chicago's pick instead of JC and our 1st, and Henne has already flashed far more upside than JC. He'll get his chance though, I think he'll wind up as a starter for one of those other teams.

Oakland makes a lot of sense.

If Denver loses Orton, Campbell is a natural target for them. I don't know if Miami is sold on Henne and Pennington is a UFA. Favre might come back for next year, but they need a better heir apparent than Tavaris Jackson.

HAWGZHEAD

12-29-2009, 03:37 PM

He's a restricted FA. can't the Skins put some kind of tag on him where they can match a low offer and use him while they build the line and draft a Qb NEXT year. The Colts come to mind did you see their backup. If the Skins refuse to match they get draft compensation?In Indy that Painter guy is really the 3rd stringer. Sorgi got IR'd but should be back next year.

If he goes I could see him in Cleveland.

MDBluefinCrab

12-29-2009, 03:53 PM

:lol1:

I would say that he can go anywhere with an offensive line that will give him at least 3-4 seconds on every play but he still has deficiencies. He still can't read a blitz. He still does not see the whole field. He still has accuracy issues (even on short passes, sheesh). I think those can be corrected in time, though.

Don't you think 5 years (3 1/2 as a starter) is enough time to correct those issues? lol.

mr.moss

12-29-2009, 07:17 PM

The Raiders should be a perfect spot for him. They seem like they dont trust Russel there so they could give Campbell a shit. Other than he can be a good good back up though....sooooo.l..... I would say that maybe....Carolina but Moore looking very good there. So IDK he'll just be a back up,probably Steelers need him as a back up.

But highly doubt he'll be a skins and for what.

BurgundyNGold

12-29-2009, 09:05 PM

Don't you think 5 years (3 1/2 as a starter) is enough time to correct those issues? lol.
It should be, of course. But I really don't think he (or anyone else on this team) has gotten much coaching for the past 2 seasons. Plus, he's just a late bloomer. There's no denying his progress. The problem is that it's coming along at the pace of continental drift. Who has time to wait for that?

The thing is, you only have to wait another couple of seasons to have a top 6 or 8 QB. Assuming he gets time to throw.

wr70beh

12-30-2009, 03:19 AM

IMO a cardboard cut out of Peyton Manning is better than Campbell. My predicition is he will be a back up somewhere else for next year and will probably be out of the league in 2012.

I think he'll be a serviceable backup for a while. Heck, Gus Frerotte made a nice living being a backup up until last year, and even started a few times between his headbutting incident here and last year.

What would slap Snyder in the face something fierce is if he gets on a team like Indy as a backup and gravy-trains a ring. He might not have anything to do with the actual winning of the ring (except run scout teams in practice), but he would shove that in Snyder's face, and I would be happy for him.

44 goes 50 gut

12-30-2009, 01:13 PM

San Fran? Backing up the clearly more promising Alex Smith?
Buffalo? Yeah sure as competition to push their younger QB
Browns? Backing up the more promising Brady Quinn?
Vikes? A huge maybe w/ Favre, a massive downgrade if so...
Cards? Backing up the much more promising Matt Linart?
Panthers? As a 3rd stringer behind Delhomme and Moore?
Seagulls? If Haselback retires?
Rams? Sure but... likely to draft a QB
Raiduhs? Gradkowski has more promise of upside but never know with the Raiders...
Denver? No way, don't see any circumstance where JC is looked at as anything but a Veteran backup with no chance to start out of camp.
Miami? As a backup to the much more promising Chad Henni?

At the rate young talented QB's seem to be coming into the league in the last few years, and as the frequency of immediately starting and playing well for their teams raises, mediocre "known commodities" especially when they're coming from a bad team, just aren't going to have flocks of teams interested in them.

Never know Allen might get a steal from someone like a senile Al Davis, but I don't see him being wooed by more than the totally desperate (like the Vikes or SeaGulls as a stop gap if Favre or MH retires).

Rams
Buffalo
Are the only teams in that list that are going to really be interested in JC as a starting QB and the Rams will still probably draft one with JC looked at as a Veteran stop gap...

Buffalo has a young QB (don't they always) that they may want to try and goom while JC starts... So maybe here is a good fit.

Oakland, well they should bring in a Vet in case Gradkowski doesn't look as good a he did in his brief starts, and all bets are off with Davis making decisions.

And the Redskins... they will need someone to start for a year or two while their drafted QB is groomed...

All in all I don't see any scenario besides the Rams and Skins where JC is brought in to be the clear starter...

akhhorus

12-30-2009, 01:45 PM

San Fran? Backing up the clearly more promising Alex Smith?

Alex Smith is more promising? Really?
2009:
Alex Smith: 10 starts, 208-344(60.5%) 2128 yards(6.2 ypa/212.8 ypg) 17 tds/12 ints 19 sacks, 80.2 qb rating. Owed about 8-12 million next year.
Campbell: 15 starts, 299-465(64.3%), 3337 yards(6.5 ypa/222.5 ypg), 18 Td/15 ints, 41 sacks, 85 qb rating.

At most one could say that they're about even. This was Campbell's(arguably) worst season, this was Alex Smith's best.

Buffalo? Yeah sure as competition to push their younger QB

New coach/GM coming in and Edwards/Fitzpatrick are terrible.

Browns? Backing up the more promising Brady Quinn?

The Browns, barring some surprise, will deal Quinn because of his contract.

Cards? Backing up the much more promising Matt Linart?

Leinart's more promising? I realize you don't like Campbell, but you might be the only person in the NFL who would think that. Leinart's owed about 30-40 million, no way he stays if there's no cap.

Panthers? As a 3rd stringer behind Delhomme and Moore?

Delhomme is gone, Moore might stay, but Campbell would beat him out easily.

Seagulls? If Haselback retires?

Watch Hasselback's last couple games. He's done.

Raiduhs? Gradkowski has more promise of upside but never know with the Raiders...

Gradkowski is a UFA I believe, I doubt he stays.

Denver? No way, don't see any circumstance where JC is looked at as anything but a Veteran backup with no chance to start out of camp.

Denver's only an option if Orton walks via free agency.

Miami? As a backup to the much more promising Chad Henne?

I think Miami's not exactly sold on Henne. He struggles with a lot of basic throws. I think that they'll give him another year, but I wouldn't be surprised if they got someone else.

oldskinfan

12-30-2009, 02:41 PM

I think if he is a restricted free agent, I don't know that anyone give up the draft choices. So he will stay here for 1 year with no guarantees and Collins goes bye-bye.

If he is unrestricted, I agree with most of Akh's comments though I think he will not be guaranteed a starting position anywhere. If I were Jason, my personal preference would be to go to Carolina. There O-line will be healthy again and a good running game is a QB's best friend. I also would love to compete for the job in Arizona with the stud WR's they have.

Commenting on Akh's notes:

San Fran - possibly - run first offense
Buffalo - possibly
Cleveland(if Mangina is fired) - possibly, especially if Holmgren puts Zorn on staff as QB coach again
Minnesota - maybe, if they lose Tavaris Jackson
Arizona(if Warner retires) - agreed
Carolina(maybe) - I think they like Matt Moore fine.
Seattle - I think they will draft and develop a QB
St Louis - see Seattle
Oakland - I think a good possibility
Denver(maybe) - they passed on him 1st time so no
Miami(maybe) - I think they will give Henne more time to develop

Shanahanigans

12-30-2009, 03:22 PM

All of these teams being listed have issues at QB. Either they have a Veteran planning retirement (Favre/Warner), or they have young QB's with "potential" (Smith/Quinn), or they simply havn't made up their mind (Henne/Gradkowski), it really doesn't matter. All of the above situations can be bad or good, its a major toss-up.

The point is, Campbell may not be Hall-of-Fame Great, but he is not a complete dud either. We at least are sure that we have mediocrity...if its not gonna cost much, we might as well hold onto him while we rebuild. There is no real rush to get a QB in this draft, there will definitely be some good options in upcoming drafts.

If it were me, I'd keep Campbell, get as many draft picks as possible and start rebuilding (starting with the OLine). He may complete his development, he may not, but there will always be QB options in upcoming drafts.

44 goes 50 gut

12-30-2009, 03:35 PM

I'll be really interested to see if JC garners anywhere near the interest level some Skins fans seem to think he will, if he's RFA I see 2 maybe 3 teams, and he's probably competing for the starting position not brought in as a clear starter...

BTW Surprised Tampa is not on this list... if young unproven QB's who maybe have upside are being swept aside so easilly then Tampa certainly qualifies... In fact thinking about it they are right there with the Rams and Bills IMO as the most likely teams...

akhhorus

12-30-2009, 03:37 PM

I'll be really interested to see if JC garners anywhere near the interest level some Skins fans seem to think he will, if he's RFA I see 2 maybe 3 teams, and he's probably competing for the starting position not brought in as a clear starter...

BTW Surprised Tampa is not on this list... if young unproven QB's who maybe have upside are being swept aside so easilly then Tampa certainly qualifies...

Tampa loves them some Josh Freeman, despite his INT problems.

wr70beh

12-30-2009, 03:41 PM

The point is, Campbell may not be Hall-of-Fame Great, but he is not a complete dud either. We at least are sure that we have mediocrity...if its not gonna cost much, we might as well hold onto him while we rebuild. There is no real rush to get a QB in this draft, there will definitely be some good options in upcoming drafts.

I have a feeling that Campbell doesn't want to stay here because of the Cutler/Sanchez situations from last off-season. He'll try everything to get out, even if he doesn't compete for a starting job. I think he'd be happy playing benchwarmer on a contender.

44 goes 50 gut

12-30-2009, 03:51 PM

If it were me, I'd keep Campbell, get as many draft picks as possible and start rebuilding (starting with the OLine). He may complete his development, he may not, but there will always be QB options in upcoming drafts.

While I'm sure we've seen what Campbell has to offer, and apparently that makes me a "hater" I also think the best move if he's restricted, is to tender him and let him compete next pre-season.. Something tells me that Snyder will make some splashy signing or another or draft Claussen and name him the starter sight unseen.

GuyNTexas

12-30-2009, 09:05 PM

While I'm sure we've seen what Campbell has to offer, and apparently that makes me a "hater" I also think the best move if he's restricted, is to tender him and let him compete next pre-season.. Something tells me that Snyder will make some splashy signing or another or draft Claussen and name him the starter sight unseen.

Hey ... you hater ... LOL. Look, this irrational excuse making for Jason's failures is some type of mass psychosis or something. I too have been labeled a hater by others, simply because I state the facts and call it like I see it.

The Campbell fan club are expert in excuses and denial. So be it. He's gone, gone gone ... and not a moment too soon.

Cracks me up to here all of the reasons Campbell hasn't thrown a TD pass from between the 50 to 20 yard line in 2+ seasons. Natta one. If Jason was in New York or Philly, they would have drawn and quartered him 2 years ago.

Here .. we want to shield him from any criticism, because we might hurt Jason's feelings. AMAZING.

colkurtz

12-31-2009, 01:44 AM

JC has reached the end of his career as a Redskin.
After 5 seasons he is an average QB. He has had a very crappy OL, however he has some big holes in his own performance as a QB:

1. He can't read a blitz
2. He can't feel pressure
3. Often completely stares down his WR
4. Can not connect accurately on passes over 20+ yards.

Time for this team to move on with new talent and a vet.

I think we should try to get all we can out of JC. However, his actual value is not nearly as high as some in this thread think. Personally, I do not think he will be a starter on another team but will fit into the #2 QB for someone.

Hr fan

12-31-2009, 07:56 AM

Polarizing figure. Most on this forum want JC to live up to his initials, but that JC died 2 millenia ago. Is our JC the answer? Think of the question in the light if an owner who hates you, a coach who is a complete loss, a bunch of receivers that can't run a pattern that isn't 3 yards short of the 1st down line, an ol that is arguably the worst in football, and absolutely no running game because the team lacks the ol to block AND a rb that anyone else wanted.

IMO we have never found out what JC has or can do, due to complete team mismanagement. How many different systems and coaches and supporting cast...

Why go there? Instead let us by into the snyder hype and draft the next Manning, put him behind a putrid ol with no running game, with substandard receivers, and watch him get beaten to a pulp. Then we can say danny did it again, selling us as 1 player short, a qb, when the game starts and ends in the trenches.

However BA and presumably Shanny will be dispasionate and see what the alternatives are. I don't think Collins survives, and Colt's physique is hardly up to the beating a new ol will afford our new savior. Therefore JC will be here unless the new braintrust sees an improvement elsewhere. If he is lucky he will be the backup, not the starter. If he moves on I hope he gets a team that has a scheme suited to his talents instead of a totally dysfunctional organization. He has earned that if only by the beating he has taken this year.

shane88

12-31-2009, 08:06 AM

Someone please refresh my old, ever diminishing memory banks here in regards to "RFA" signing procedures....

Player A is a RFA of Team X
Player A can sign an offer sheet from Team Y
Team X has the opportunity now to match the offer of Team Y, if they so desire..
If Team X declines to match Team Y's offer, then Player A can sign with Team Y and Team X will now recieve a comparable value draft pick for Player A

Is this pretty close to how it works or am I combing both "RFA" AND "FA" proceedings(I dont think I am)?

As for Campbell, I'm sure he'll get at least enough of an offer to where he would gladly get the hell outta DC and it's gonna depend on whether the new HC(Shanny, no doubt) wants to keep him while grooming a new kid. While I think JC has shown us his best(which is mediocre at best), it's not a bad idea to keep him for another season and build the O-line(and possibly a young QB). It'll be interesting to sit back and watch how a REAL GM and HC work for a change instead of Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dee-de-deeee.

On a side not, I had the strangest dream last night....Stephon Heyer was working as the "Greeter" at our local Wal-Mart!!! And he was wearing a knee brace over his jeans!?!?! (NEVER eat a fried bologna sandwich before bed).

smoak

12-31-2009, 10:30 AM

Hopefully jc goes to a team I don't hate... Miami would be fine as would carolina, Green Bay, Minnesota, buffalo, and Calgary.

MadDog97

12-31-2009, 10:45 AM

I don't buy him coming to Charlotte, especially because Fox is staying. They owe Delhomme another $12+mill guaranteed and it makes more sense for them to hand things over to Moore who has played quite well for them lately and costs them nothing. Campbell would fit their offense well, but the dollars don't make sense.

I could see him fitting in well out in San Francisco.

With the way Moore played I don't see him in Carolina.

MadDog97

12-31-2009, 10:51 AM

Anywhere but here.
Campbell has grit, and all the physical tools, and he is right to complain about a moron of an owner and GM who looked at our OL and did nothing except Dockery in the offseason, but...
He is slow mentally, and would need years and the right system to succeed. Trade him for whatever you can get--no one's coughing up a 1st and 3rd--and use the 3rd or 4th round pick you get for him on a G or T. Start from scratch with a young franchise QB.
Again, not all Campbell's fault, but he is just too slow mentally to be an elite QB anytime soon.

Let's see, he's slow mentally but he has had to learn a new system annually and he gets hit to the point of being punch drunk. That accusation does not hold under scrutiny. He is also not a West coast style QB, but I suppose that is his fault too.

I would like to see JC behind a competent offensive line and in the same system for two years. When Favre leaves Minn, there may be an opening or maybe San Fran with a coach that will help and support him.

skin4ever

12-31-2009, 11:31 AM

GuyNTexas

12-31-2009, 12:06 PM

Let's see, he's slow mentally but he has had to learn a new system annually and he gets hit to the point of being punch drunk. That accusation does not hold under scrutiny. He is also not a West coast style QB, but I suppose that is his fault too.

I would like to see JC behind a competent offensive line and in the same system for two years. When Favre leaves Minn, there may be an opening or maybe San Fran with a coach that will help and support him.

You, and so many others ... including TV commentators continue to exaggerate greatly, "all of these systems" JC has been forced to learn. The reality is that JC has played in exactly TWO systems in 4 years ... not three, not four, not twelve ... TWO.

Al Saunders was brought in prior to the start of the 2006 season, and Mark Brunell was delegated the task of learning this complex offense during training camp and expected to execute it flawlessly on opening day. He struggled with it, and the fans where calling for his head to be chopped off after 5 games. FIVE GAMES! Drawn and quartered ... and whatever other forms of torture imaginable! He was replaced by Campbell after 9 games, who had the luxury of studying the offense throughout training camp, and for slightly over half a season. Campbell finished the final 7 games in 06 as the starter with a record of 2-5, and stats that were not significantly better than Brunell, averaging 1.9 points per game better, 18.3/g for Brunell, and 20.2/g for Campbell.

Then, JC had the entire offseason, mini camp, pre season, and 12 1/2 games of the 2007 regular season in the same offense that he'd taken every snap as a Redskin starting QB prior to being injured. The Redskins averaged 18.3/g for those 12 1/2 games in 2007 (exactly the number of points per game Brunell averaged in the first 9 games with this new, complex offense which Campbell had infinitely more time to learn, as did the rest of his teammates, yet ZERO increase in production.

Enter Collins at the half way point of game 13 against the Bears. The Redskins finished the final 4 games averaging 26.2 points/g with Collins using the same o-line and the short receivers that were the prime excuse for why JC wasn't producing. (Collins actual points average was 30/g since he only played 1/2 of the Bears game).

Now, you tell me ... would it have been a better idea to keep Saunders as the OC, and have Collins run it ... or was the choice to scrap it, and change the entire system, with JC running it, the proper choice? Let's look at what ACTUALLY happened.

The Redskin offense with Zorn/Campbell in 2008 averaged 16.6 points per game, and this year it's 16.4. So, in spite of the moderate increase in certain personal stats for Campbell himself in 2009, the offense is actually scoring less than last year with Campbell at the helm, and less than the offense was scoring under Brunell in 2006 when Redskin nation was demanding his head.

The fascination, and the excuse making for Campbell has no rational foundation when compared to how Brunell was treated. No one was cutting Brunell any slack whatsoever for having a totally new offense to learn in the short span of training camp, and demanding he be benched after 5 games, yet they declare it totally unfair to not give Campbell three years to learn one?

The bottom line is that Campbell has played in two systems with the Redskins, not twenty, and the offense has had a continual decline in point production each year he's been the starter.

And in spite of the poor production that has taken place with two separate systems, and two different offensive coaching staffs, including MISERABLE stretches of completely inept performances over the past two years ... everyone GASPS in horror at the mention of benching JC, even for a single game.

Some even suggest that we continue next season with another new system, and keep Campbell to run that one too?

My answer to that is ... just how long should the Redskins keep whacking the same thumb with the same hammer? :smash:

redcayman

12-31-2009, 12:21 PM

Its interesting to read the messages boards regarding JC. I dont think anyone is a polarizing of a figure. My question is this If given a choice why would JC come back here to be the tackling dummy for some young QB to take his place. I would be offended to get my butt kicked just so some other guy could take my place. I would rather be the #2 somewhere or have to compete than to subject myself to that crap. Even if I was RFA I would take a moderate deal somewhere else so that a team would'nt feel bad about giving up negotiated compensation. Noone is going to give up a first and a third but they may give up a 3rd and a 5th.

akhhorus

12-31-2009, 12:31 PM

You, and so many others ... including TV commentators continue to exaggerate greatly, "all of these systems" JC has been forced to learn. The reality is that JC has played in exactly TWO systems in 4 years ... not three, not four, not twelve ... TWO.

No, thats wrong. Gibbs' 2005 system, Saunders in 06/07 and Zorn's in 08/09(and if you want to get picky, Lewis' in 09). However when commentators bring up Campbell's various systems, they're talking about what Campbell went through in college also, when he had 4 systems in 4 years.

Al Saunders was brought in prior to the start of the 2006 season, and Mark Brunell was delegated the task of learning this complex offense during training camp and expected to execute it flawlessly on opening day. He struggled with it, and the fans where calling for his head to be chopped off after 5 games. FIVE GAMES! Drawn and quartered ... and whatever other forms of torture imaginable! He was replaced by Campbell after 9 games, who had the luxury of studying the offense throughout training camp, and for slightly over half a season. Campbell finished the final 7 games in 06 as the starter with a record of 2-5, and stats that were not significantly better than Brunell, averaging 1.9 points per game better, 18.3/g for Brunell, and 20.2/g for Campbell.

So...whats your point? A smart vet couldn't digest Saunders' offense and you're surprised that a 2nd year player couldn't come off the bench in the middle of the season to make the complicated offense that confused a vet work better?

Enter Collins at the half way point of game 13 against the Bears. The Redskins finished the final 4 games averaging 26.2 points/g with Collins using the same o-line and the short receivers that were the prime excuse for why JC wasn't producing. (Collins actual points average was 30/g since he only played 1/2 of the Bears game)

Except that it was the improved play of Clinton Portis that made the 2007 team better from Campbell to Collins.

Now, you tell me ... would it have been a better idea to keep Saunders as the OC, and have Collins run it ... or was the choice to scrap it, and change the entire system, with JC running it, the proper choice?

See above.

Let's look at what ACTUALLY happened.

The Redskin offense with Zorn/Campbell in 2008 averaged 16.6 points per game, and this year it's 16.4. So, in spite of the moderate increase in certain personal stats for Campbell himself in 2009, the offense is actually scoring less than last year with Campbell at the helm, and less than the offense was scoring under Brunell in 2006 when Redskin nation was demanding his head.

The fascination, and the excuse making for Campbell has no rational foundation when compared to how Brunell was treated. No one was cutting Brunell any slack whatsoever for having a totally new offense to learn in the short span of training camp, and demanding he be benched after 5 games, yet they declare it totally unfair to not give Campbell three years to learn one?

So, why can't Todd Collins look any better when he's in there for Campbell under Zorn?

The bottom line is that Campbell has played in two systems with the Redskins, not twenty, and the offense has had a continual decline in point production each year he's been the starter.

If you honestly think that Campbell is the cause for the decline and not Zorn ineptness+offensive line problems in the last 2 seasons, then this discussion is pointless. You can see a demarcation in the offensive production across the board when Chris Samuels got hurt in 2008, Campbell's not good enough a player to overcome those kinds of problems. That doesn't mean he's a total waste like you want to claim, but he's just not the kind of player who can thrive when his offensive line was as effective as cardboard cutouts.

And in spite of the poor production that has taken place with two separate systems, and two different offensive coaching staffs, including MISERABLE stretches of completely inept performances over the past two years ... everyone GASPS in horror at the mention of benching JC, even for a single game.

Thats because the Skins didn't have a reasonable option to replace Campbell with. In the times when Collins replaced him in 2009, he actually looked as bad or worse at QB. If the skins had a reasonable vet option or some young QB with talent to groom(and Cult Brennan was never that), then benching Campbell this season was reasonable to consider. When it became clear that playing Collins would guarantee an even worse season, it wasn't reasonable.

sinskin

12-31-2009, 12:46 PM

Has he? I dont think we'd be having these conversations if he learned them, and was efficient under them. As for getting hit, other Qb's are hit too, and hit at a greater rate yet still find a way to win games, and beat better teams than we have. Im surprised at the acceptance of mediocrity with regard to this guy. Do you think Zorn should stay as well. I mean he was given crap and the FO expected him to make a fine gourmet meal? I believe he had no say in any direction of taking players, so why not give him the same excuses? For the record Zorn should be gone too, im just saying for the sake of argument.

I'm not a Campbell supporter but I will say this. He may not have the most sacks on him in the NFL but I do not believe for a second that someone else has been hit at a greater rate then JC. This cat has been blistered, sack or no sack he gets hit everytime!

akhhorus

12-31-2009, 12:54 PM

I'm not a Campbell supporter but I will say this. He may not have the most sacks on him in the NFL but I do not believe for a second that someone else has been hit at a greater rate then JC. This cat has been blistered, sack or no sack he gets hit everytime!

Link (http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?offensiveStatisticCategory=OFFENSIVE _LINE&archive=false&d-447263-o=2&qualified=true&tabSeq=2&role=TM&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=PASSING_QBHIT&d-447263-n=1)

44 sacks given up by the oline, 90 Qb hits. And thats not counting hurries(which I would bet would be over 140).

44 goes 50 gut

12-31-2009, 01:01 PM

akhhorus

12-31-2009, 01:07 PM

HAHAH Mike Singletary? yeah he's likely to continue the coddling :) Let me repeat they LIKE Alex Smith there.

Miami, has Henne and they are at least as fond of him after some of his late game heroics as Carolina is of Moore... Henne in half a season looks at least as good as Campbell, and I would argue that he's clearly smarter, has better fundamentals a quicker release, as strong an arm with more accurate long balls and has publicly said he loves pressure. So his head is screwed on right. Hell in my book it's enough that he's a Parcels guy who can clearly play, that alone gives him another season or two to prove himself. There's zero chance they are interested in Campbell, I doubt Campbell passes many of Bill Parcells QB criteria. I think people are over valuing Campbell. But we'll see. I predict he's a 2nd stringer on any team except Buffalo, the Rams or the Skins, or possibly a team that has an unpredictable opening such as due to this unknown capped/uncapped year and free agency rules, or someone retiring (Favre or Hasselback).

If you're looking for a QB this offseason, you have few options:
-draft(but its thin after Bradford)
-Campbell
-Chris Redman
-Trade for Leinart(and the 30 or so million left on his contract) or Brady Quinn(and the 30 or so million left on his contract).
-The corpses of Matt Hasselback or Jake Delhomme.
-Pennington coming off of a major shoulder/arm injury

Pretty thin pickings imo.

flave1969

12-31-2009, 01:15 PM

JC's uncertain future (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/30/AR2009123002532.html?sid=ST2009123003430)

According to this article in the Post the situation facing JC is pretty complicated.

If the Redskins want to keep him they will either need to match another teams offer or tender him.

Campbell's minimum tender amount would be $3.14 million, according to a league source familiar with his contract situation. If the Redskins increased the offer to $3.268 million, they would receive first- and third-round compensation. Campbell has a salary of a little more than $2.857 million this season.

No team is going to give up a 1st and 3rd for JC so if we want to keep him for a year whilst blooding a rookie it will cost $3.268 million. I dont know if that is expensive or not but it isn't much more than they pay him now.

I cant see the Redskins matching a two or three year offer so he will go if he is not tendered.

Before people say get rid of him look at this list of UFA if there is not cap, it is not a very good sounding list.

Charlie Batch, Kyle Boller, Mark Brunell, David Carr, Daunte Culpepper, A.J. Feeley, Rex Grossman, Josh McCown, Chad Pennington, Chris Redman, Brian St. Pierre

Is there really anything better there?

My instinct is that we will live and die by a rookie next year and that will be a first pick rookie. Which means our line will likely not receive the attention it deserves and it could be uglier than last year.

GuyNTexas

12-31-2009, 02:08 PM

No, thats wrong. Gibbs' 2005 system, Saunders in 06/07 and Zorn's in 08/09(and if you want to get picky, Lewis' in 09). However when commentators bring up Campbell's various systems, they're talking about what Campbell went through in college also, when he had 4 systems in 4 years.

He never played in "Gibbs" system. And Lewis doesn't have a system. Campbell has a Lewis cheat list on his wrist that translates B24 to the actual play LOL.

And what the heck does his college OCs have to do with the Redskins? One could just as easily suggest that Campbell was the REASON for having 4 OCs in college ... ever crossed your mind that Auburn committed the same mistakes as the Redskins ... believing that the lack of production surely couldn't be the player's fault, and changed coaches every year? Ever hear of a player being a "Coach Killer"? Campbell has 6 notches on his belt, and would be envied by Wyatt Earp.

So...whats your point? A smart vet couldn't digest Saunders' offense and you're surprised that a 2nd year player couldn't come off the bench in the middle of the season to make the complicated offense that confused a vet work better?

I thought the point was pretty simple. Everyone expected Brunell to produce, day one ... while giving Campbell a pass, and manufacturing excuses for a year and a half. That's the point ... still don't see it?

Except that it was the improved play of Clinton Portis that made the 2007 team better from Campbell to Collins.

Right. Collins comes in cold off the bench with 3 1/2 minutes left in the first half of the Bears game ... immediately takes the team down for a TD. Then he opens up the second half and does the same thing ... scoring two TDs in two straight series, in little over 4 minutes ... and you want to claim that the instant Collins entered the game, Portis magically awoke from a 12 1/2 game snooze? Get real.

See above. Ditto.

So, why can't Todd Collins look any better when he's in there for Campbell under Zorn?

But he did, you're just in denial. He came in during the NYG game and played what ... 5 plays? He went 2/4 and 57 yards ... with one dropped TD pass to Davis ... otherwise he'd have been 3-4 87 yards and a TD. But in Zorn's infinite wisdom, he followed that up with that laughing stock trick play, and then opened the second half with a bruised up Campbell ... inexplicably.

If you honestly think that Campbell is the cause for the decline and not Zorn ineptness+offensive line problems in the last 2 seasons, then this discussion is pointless. You can see a demarcation in the offensive production across the board when Chris Samuels got hurt in 2008, Campbell's not good enough a player to overcome those kinds of problems. That doesn't mean he's a total waste like you want to claim, but he's just not the kind of player who can thrive when his offensive line was as effective as cardboard cutouts.

I tell you what I see ... I see a QB that has shown consistently sub-par play covering 4 seasons and two separate offensive systems. That the o-line has been devastated with injuries this year has been a convenient excuse to fall back on (if you ignore what transpired the previous three seasons, including the last 4 games of 2007, when a career backup QB who no one is going to confuse with Peyton Manning came in cold and played circles around Campbell).

But back to current events ... what no one has been able to explain to my satisfaction is why all of the missed opportunities when Campbell does get adequate pass protection? Why all of the inaccurate 5 yard hitch passes? The late thrown slant passes, and the ints this year that have come from poorly thrown balls that were not caused by pressure?

Everyone ... even Jason's fan club, cannot deny the many missed opportunities down field over the past two seasons, especially the ones where Moss has his guy beat deep (which happens frequently) and Jason throws a bad pass or doesn't even see him at all.

Oh you do deny it? OK, then what you must be saying is that this dubious statistic that shows that Campbell has thrown just one TD pass from between the 50 to the 20 yard lines in three seasons is because there have been no opportunities? That one TD he threw was in 07. He has ZERO for the past two full seasons.

Compare that to Aaron Rogers who has thrown 7 this year, between the 50-20, while being sacked more than Campbell. Compare that to Eli manning who has thrown 9, this year between the 50-20 yard line.

The point is, Campbell doesn't throw TD passes ... he throws 5 yard dump offs from the red zone only.

Yes, Rogers is a great example of the flaw in such excuse making. He has 29 TDs, 7 ints, 4,200 yards with an 0-line that has given up an NFL high 50 sacks. And he was picked ONE SPOT ahead of Campbell in the 2005 draft, and Campbell has almost a full season more playing experience.

Oh yes .... Campbell has had to learn 14 different .... I mean 2 different systems, while Rogers only had to learn 1.

Thats because the Skins didn't have a reasonable option to replace Campbell with. In the times when Collins replaced him in 2009, he actually looked as bad or worse at QB. If the skins had a reasonable vet option or some young QB with talent to groom(and Cult Brennan was never that), then benching Campbell this season was reasonable to consider. When it became clear that playing Collins would guarantee an even worse season, it wasn't reasonable.

Again, not true .. Collins has a total of about 30 snaps over three games this year ... not exactly what I'd call a baseline for drawing comparisons or conclusions. Again, you want to have it both ways .... Campbell has started all 31 games under Zorn .... and Collins has come in for brief relief 3 times in two years ... 31 games isn't enough to judge Campbell, but 30 plays is enough to judge Collins? I got it. You're a Campbell apologist.

akhhorus

12-31-2009, 02:35 PM

First off Guy: switch to Decaf.

He never played in "Gibbs" system. And Lewis doesn't have a system. Campbell has a Lewis cheat list on his wrist that translates B24 to the actual play LOL.

He had to learn Gibbs' system, or are you trying to claim that Gibbs didn't teach him anything during his rookie year?

And what the heck does his college OCs have to do with the Redskins?

I said that when commentators bring up the amount of systems Campbell's had to learn, they bring up the fact of how many he had in College. So this comment of yours makes no sense.

One could just as easily suggest that Campbell was the REASON for having 4 OCs in college ... ever crossed your mind that Auburn committed the same mistakes as the Redskins ... believing that the lack of production surely couldn't be the player's fault, and changed coaches every year? Ever hear of a player being a "Coach Killer"? Campbell has 6 notches on his belt, and would be envied by Wyatt Earp.

No offense, but you're making stuff up to feed your narrative. Campbell didn't keep forcing them to find new offensive coordinators. And the one he did very well with, Borges, didn't do well after Campbell left.

I thought the point was pretty simple. Everyone expected Brunell to produce, day one ... while giving Campbell a pass, and manufacturing excuses for a year and a half. That's the point ... still don't see it?

Your analogy doesn't make any sense. Brunell was a vet nearing the end of the line on a team that was expected to compete for the Super Bowl, so when that team struggled(which wasn't totally his fault, Williams' defense was horrendous that year but he was the scapegoat for it), they benched him. There's no comparison with that and a rookie who had multiple systems to learn at the start of his career.

Right. Collins comes in cold off the bench with 3 1/2 minutes left in the first half of the Bears game ... immediately takes the team down for a TD. Then he opens up the second half and does the same thing ... scoring two TDs in two straight series, in little over 4 minutes ... and you want to claim that the instant Collins entered the game, Portis magically awoke from a 12 1/2 game snooze? Get real.

I debunked this myth before:
http://www.hailredskins.com/vbforum/showpost.php?p=1255461&postcount=131

Even if you want to throw in the Chicago game stats, it still doesn't look like Collins was suddenly the savior.

But he did, you're just in denial. He came in during the NYG game and played what ... 5 plays? He went 2/4 and 57 yards ... with one dropped TD pass to Davis ... otherwise he'd have been 3-4 87 yards and a TD.

He hit one long pass to Moss(like he did in the KC game) and did little else.

But in Zorn's infinite wisdom, he followed that up with that laughing stock trick play, and then opened the second half with a bruised up Campbell ... inexplicably.

Because Collins is useless. We saw that in the KC game.

I tell you what I see ... I see a QB that has shown consistently sub-par play covering 4 seasons and two separate offensive systems.

3 offensive systems. Meanwhile Todd Collins was in the Saunders system for what, 10 years?

That the o-line has been devastated with injuries this year has been a convenient excuse to fall back on (if you ignore what transpired the previous three seasons, including the last 4 games of 2007, when a career backup QB who no one is going to confuse with Peyton Manning came in cold and played circles around Campbell).

A fact isn't a convenient excuse. The running game, 3rd down conversion percentage, points per game, and yards per game all drop like a stone after Samuels gets hurt. And Collins didn't play circles around Campbell.

But back to current events ... what no one has been able to explain to my satisfaction is why all of the missed opportunities when Campbell does get adequate pass protection? Why all of the inaccurate 5 yard hitch passes? The late thrown slant passes, and the ints this year that have come from poorly thrown balls that were not caused by pressure?

No one said that Campbell is a great player. He struggles with some facets of the game, but he also clearly has starter level talent.

Everyone ... even Jason's fan club, cannot deny the many missed opportunities down field over the past two seasons, especially the ones where Moss has his guy beat deep (which happens frequently) and Jason throws a bad pass or doesn't even see him at all.

And how many times did he made a good pass only to see ARE or Moss get butterfingers? That door swings both ways.

Oh you do deny it? OK, then what you must be saying is that this dubious statistic that shows that Campbell has thrown just one TD pass from between the 50 to the 20 yard lines in three seasons is because there have been no opportunities? That one TD he threw was in 07. He has ZERO for the past two full seasons.

Wow, thats selective stat use since I never brought up long TD passes.

Compare that to Aaron Rogers who has thrown 7 this year, between the 50-20, while being sacked more than Campbell. Compare that to Eli manning who has thrown 9, this year between the 50-20 yard line.

I must have missed when I(or anyone) said Campbell was as good as Aaron Rogers or Eli Manning, can you please show which post where I said that?

And I can play the selective stats use game also:
Campbell in 2009:
*A better completion percentage(64.3) than Rogers(63.9), Flacco(63.3), Eli(61.7), Romo(62.6), McNabb(60.7) or Sanchez(54)
*More yards(3337) than McNabb(3330), Palmer(3094) or Sanchez(2381)
*More first downs than McNabb, Cutler, Orton, Palmer, Ryan and Sanchez
etc etc etc

The point is, Campbell doesn't throw TD passes ... he throws 5 yard dump offs from the red zone only.

Is that him or the offense? I know you want Campbell to be to blame for everything, but try to be honest this once.

Yes, Rogers is a great example of the flaw in such excuse making. He has 29 TDs, 7 ints, 4,200 yards with an 0-line that has given up an NFL high 50 sacks. And he was picked ONE SPOT ahead of Campbell in the 2005 draft, and Campbell has almost a full season more playing experience.

Rogers has had only to learn one system and has 3 very good WRs(plus 2 good pass catching Rbs and a good young TE).

Oh yes .... Campbell has had to learn 14 different .... I mean 2 different systems, while Rogers only had to learn 1.

3, and you're just attacking your own point that changing systems on a young Qb is a bad idea.

Again, not true .. Collins has a total of about 30 snaps over three games this year ... not exactly what I'd call a baseline for drawing comparisons or conclusions. Again, you want to have it both ways .... Campbell has started all 31 games under Zorn .... and Collins has come in for brief relief 3 times in two years ... 31 games isn't enough to judge Campbell, but 30 plays is enough to judge Collins? I got it. You're a Campbell apologist.

Pointing out the fact of how Collins looked is just that, and I'm not an apologist just because I disagree with your rambling monologue. Collins got an entire half against the same opponent this year and looked worse than Campbell did in the same game(Collins did hit a long ball to Moss, then promptly did nothing productive). Whenever he's come in for Campbell, he hasn't shown anything that would make anyone think that he would be any better in the current situation, which was my point(and this response of yours really has nothing to do with my comment) and why benching Campbell this year would have bordered on the insane.

bigcmr

12-31-2009, 04:03 PM

akhhorus

12-31-2009, 04:04 PM

I know the FA pool is for QBs is thin. And drafting a QB takes time to devlop. But everyone lets be honest no coach in there right mind will come here and keep Campbel. Look might as well start over new.

Agreed, but not just that: why would Campbell stay in any event unless we were paying him WAY too much money. After last offseason when we flirted with every QB, it was clear that the skins decided to replace him.

GuyNTexas

12-31-2009, 07:13 PM

First off Guy: switch to Decaf.

He had to learn Gibbs' system, or are you trying to claim that Gibbs didn't teach him anything during his rookie year?

No, I'm saying he didn't play in a different system every year with the Redskins, as is constantly claimed. If I had a dollar for every time I've heard that all Campbell needs is two years in the same system .... yet he's had that TWICE. He played in one system ... Saunders system ... in 2006 and 2007, and then Zorn's in 2008, 2009, contrary to those who claim he's never had a chance to learn a system.

No offense, but you're making stuff up to feed your narrative. Campbell didn't keep forcing them to find new offensive coordinators. And the one he did very well with, Borges, didn't do well after Campbell left.

I'm not making anything up ... I'm just speculating. As for the 2004 Auburn team's success, I think it had a little SOMETHING to do with Ronnie Brown & Cadillac Williams both having great years, and drafted 2nd and 5th overall in the 2005 NFL 1st round!!! In 2004 ... Auburn ran for more TDs (27) than they did passing (25) (Campbell had 20), and that team relied heavily on their running game, making Campbell's job much easier. Brown and Williams were not there in 2005 either. Think they might have been missed? And just ask yourself how many College football teams have two running backs that are both picked in the top 5 spots of the draft in the same year? I don't know the answer, but I'd bet it doesn't happen very often.

Your analogy doesn't make any sense. Brunell was a vet nearing the end of the line on a team that was expected to compete for the Super Bowl, so when that team struggled(which wasn't totally his fault, Williams' defense was horrendous that year but he was the scapegoat for it), they benched him. There's no comparison with that and a rookie who had multiple systems to learn at the start of his career.

My analogy makes perfect sense if you were to fairly apply the excuse machine. How much NFL experience Brunell had doesn't negate the complexity of Saunders offense one bit ... an offense Brunell was given only training camp to learn. But more importantly ... and this is an issue that REALLY IRKS ME, is that it was not just Brunell that had to learn this new offense, it was the entire offensive team that had to learn it too ... receivers, running backs, o-linemen and all of the pass routs, blocking assignments and protections, etc. So if anything, one could speculate that the entire supporting cast was better prepared to execute the offense later in the year with Campbell than they were in the first few games, as they too were learning the new system.

Surely, after 16 games in 2006, along with a full off season of study, and 2007, the supporting cast understood the offense better than they did during the first few games when it was brand new? Yet the offense regressed, scoring less points ... until Collins came in and proved that the receivers were not too short, knew their routs and where they should be, and the line was not as horrible as some people made the out to be after all.

I debunked this myth before:
http://www.hailredskins.com/vbforum/showpost.php?p=1255461&postcount=131

Even if you want to throw in the Chicago game stats, it still doesn't look like Collins was suddenly the savior.

No you did' ent The stats for Collins are so in enormously superior that I don't know how you can say that with a straight face!

First, the Chicago game ... Collins put 24 points on the board, threw 15/20 (that's 75% in case your math is rusty) 224 yards, 2 TDs and zero ints in just over 33 minutes (1/2 game). Those are numbers Campbell rarely achieves in an entire game ... but in the Chicago game, it was even worse ... something like 90 yards, no points, and several 3 and outs.

Now let's also address the "that's because Portis remembered how to run" nonsense .... Portis finished the Chicago game with a WHOPPING 36 yards on 17 carries (2.1 yards per attempt), and though I haven't checked, I'd bet that is one of the worst games, if not THE WORST game Portis has ever had, be it in Washington or Denver.

So consider your debunking, debunked.

The fact that Collins averaged over 250 per game (888 yards in 3.5 games), 64% comp, 5 TDs 0 ints, and a QB rating of 106.4 (the highest QB rating of any QB in the league over those last 4 games proved that the Chicago game was not a fluke, as so many wanted to do after the game.

He hit one long pass to Moss(like he did in the KC game) and did little else.

He also threw a TD that Davis dropped. And just what was he supposed to do after that? He was on the bench. What a bum ... he did little else ... from the sideline.

Because Collins is useless. We saw that in the KC game.

Once again, the double standard. When the offense falls on it's face with Campbell, it's the other 10 guys that are at fault ... but if Collins comes in and doesn't throw a TD pass on every series, he's useless? OK, I see your point.

3 offensive systems. Meanwhile Todd Collins was in the Saunders system for what, 10 years?

Uhhhh, no. There goes this exaggeration thing again. Not ten years, or eight, or even 6 years ... Saunders was only in KC for a total of 5 years, and Collins never started a game in it until 2007 with the Redskins.

A fact isn't a convenient excuse. The running game, 3rd down conversion percentage, points per game, and yards per game all drop like a stone after Samuels gets hurt. And Collins didn't play circles around Campbell.

Facts seems to be something you are confusing with opinions. The facts are, Collins did play circles around Campbell, statistically across the board in the areas most important ... Yards, TD's, and Wins. Campbell, going into the Bears game was on a 4 game losing streak (0-4), and Collins finished the year 4-0.

No one said that Campbell is a great player. He struggles with some facets of the game, but he also clearly has starter level talent.

Clearly, starter level talent? Clearly? The only thing clear is that Campbell requires ideal circumstances in order to be successful, but in the NFL, rarely are circumstances ideal, and even more rarely do teams not suffer injuries.

But saying Campbell struggles with some facets of the game is rather funny ... yeah, he struggles to score points, and and loses more games than he wins. Are those the facets you are referring to? Points and Winning?

And how many times did he made a good pass only to see ARE or Moss get butterfingers? That door swings both ways.

And they are the only receivers in the NFL that drop passes ... all of the other QBs never have dropped passes?

Wow, thats selective stat use since I never brought up long TD passes.

No, not selective, just a stat conveniently overlooked when discussing Campbell's yards and completion %, as if those stats actually win games. I use this stat ... TDs thrown between the 50-20 yard line because it's a good measure of a QB's skill and ability to execute one of their most important functions .. that is to throw TD passes. Anyone can hand the ball off to a running back, and most can manage a 5 yard dump off pass, neither of which takes a great deal of skill or accuracy.

That Campbell hasn't done it even once in two full seasons is particularly noteworthy and troubling ... so I noted it. It's one of those statistics that directly challenge this notion that he "Clearly has starter level talent". Find me another starting QB that has played two years and hasn't thrown a TD pass from that area of the field in two years.

I must have missed when I(or anyone) said Campbell was as good as Aaron Rogers or Eli Manning, can you please show which post where I said that?

Never said you did, but if you just look down to your next comment, you do insinuate ... ...

This is in response to the stuff I hear all the time about how no QB could be expected to succeed with the Redskin's o-line ... I just used Rogers as an example that a bad o-line is no excuse for abject failure on the part of the QB. Rogers ranks 4th in the league, yet his 0-line gives up more sacks than the Redskins line does.

And I can play the selective stats use game also:
Campbell in 2009:
*A better completion percentage(64.3) than Rogers(63.9), Flacco(63.3), Eli(61.7), Romo(62.6), McNabb(60.7) or Sanchez(54)
*More yards(3337) than McNabb(3330), Palmer(3094) or Sanchez(2381)
*More first downs than McNabb, Cutler, Orton, Palmer, Ryan and Sanchez
etc etc etc

It's amazing how GOOD Campbell is with such a lousy team around him, isn't it? See, this is the blatant contradiction that is repeated so often ... Campbell doesn't succeed because the team he's on is terrible, only to turn right around and show how these statistics prove he's good.

Has the thought ever occurred to you that his completion percentage should be good since 25% of his passes are thrown BEHIND THE LINE OF SCRIMMAGE? Since these passes behind the line should be completed close to 100%, that would mean that his completion % past the line is roughly 48%.

Is that him or the offense? I know you want Campbell to be to blame for everything, but try to be honest this once.

See, this is the deal. I don't blame Campbell for all of what is wrong with the Redskins offense. He's just a big part of it. The Campbell apologists are the ones who want to claim that he's some kind of victim. He's not a victim of anything other than his own inability to learn and grow better. He still exhibits the same problems he did from the very beginning, and much of the pass rush pressure he faces is because he's slow to read defenses and holds the ball too long. He rarely punishes defenses with big plays so they continue to blitz the daylights out of him. The majority of his passes are within 7 yards of the line, so defenses don't need to guard against any medium and deep threats, allowing them to stack the box and shut down both the running game while still protecting the short passing routs.

If you understood football better, you'd understand the cause and effect here, and how Campbell's own shortcomings amplify the troubles on the line in both pass pro and run game. He's just not a very good QB.

Rogers has had only to learn one system and has 3 very good WRs(plus 2 good pass catching Rbs and a good young TE).

Receivers don't throw the ball to themselves. Those receivers have to have a QB that gets them the ball. But if Campbell were in Green Bay, those guys wouldn't get that ... because they have such a bad o-line. And you can look at Santana's numbers from 2005 and then look at them since and see if anything, he is a victim of Campbell being the QB, not vice versa.

3, and you're just attacking your own point that changing systems on a young Qb is a bad idea.

No, I'm saying it isn't the system ... it's the QB. And we've seen enough to know that.

Pointing out the fact of how Collins looked is just that, and I'm not an apologist just because I disagree with your rambling monologue. Collins got an entire half against the same opponent this year and looked worse than Campbell did in the same game(Collins did hit a long ball to Moss, then promptly did nothing productive). Whenever he's come in for Campbell, he hasn't shown anything that would make anyone think that he would be any better in the current situation, which was my point(and this response of yours really has nothing to do with my comment) and why benching Campbell this year would have bordered on the insane.

Really ... Collins got an entire half? Wow. Well that proves it, doesn't it. A whole half.

As far as insane goes ... the definition of insane is doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.

And I'm not the only one who thinks benching Campbell would have been a good idea. Sonny said earlier this year that the Redskins would have been far better off starting Collins. I think Sonny knows a thing or two about being a QB ... no?

bigcmr

12-31-2009, 09:31 PM

Canuck

12-31-2009, 09:49 PM

That was Vinny doing. Don't discount the role Snyder played in pursuing Cutler and Sanchez.

bigcmr

12-31-2009, 10:04 PM

Don't discount the role Snyder played in pursuing Cutler and Sanchez.

True but I dont think B. Allan and who ever the new coach is will keep Campbell. Why would you if your starting over.

tuckahoeskin

12-31-2009, 10:49 PM

True but I dont think B. Allan and who ever the new coach is will keep Campbell. Why would you if your starting over.

Also, if Shanahan is the coach and he asks JC to stay, that would likely carry a lot of weight. For all of JC's faults, I still think in the right situation he could be pretty good. Compare him to other starters around the league. Is he better than what the Rams have? Seahawks? Chiefs? Bears? Bills? Jets? Panthers? Phins? Jags? Texans? Raiders? Browns? Cards (if the old man leaves)?

Anyone reading this tends to post here everyday. That's an awful lot of opportunity to over-analyze any player. Maybe we all need some perspective. The O-Line has been worse than crap. The coaching has been awful and the lead receiver feels the need to jump to catch every hitch at his belt. Yes, JC needs a lot of work and improvement as well. If the next coaching staff wants him, I'll support him. If he goes somewhere else, I wouldn't be surprised if he found success.

shally

12-31-2009, 10:53 PM

JC's uncertain future (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/30/AR2009123002532.html?sid=ST2009123003430)

According to this article in the Post the situation facing JC is pretty complicated.

If the Redskins want to keep him they will either need to match another teams offer or tender him.

No team is going to give up a 1st and 3rd for JC so if we want to keep him for a year whilst blooding a rookie it will cost $3.268 million. I dont know if that is expensive or not but it isn't much more than they pay him now.

I cant see the Redskins matching a two or three year offer so he will go if he is not tendered.

Before people say get rid of him look at this list of UFA if there is not cap, it is not a very good sounding list.

Charlie Batch, Kyle Boller, Mark Brunell, David Carr, Daunte Culpepper, A.J. Feeley, Rex Grossman, Josh McCown, Chad Pennington, Chris Redman, Brian St. Pierre

Is there really anything better there?

My instinct is that we will live and die by a rookie next year and that will be a first pick rookie. Which means our line will likely not receive the attention it deserves and it could be uglier than last year.

anything in the range of 3-4 million per year is chump change for a QB, so the Skins will undoubtedly tender JC, even if they want to trade him

my guess is that they hope to get a second rounder for him.. that is all culpeper fetched and he had better record, even if it was abetted by Moss

shally

12-31-2009, 10:58 PM

I know the FA pool is for QBs is thin. And drafting a QB takes time to devlop. But everyone lets be honest no coach in there right mind will come here and keep Campbel. Look might as well start over new.

on THAT, i profoundly agree.. Zorn came here as a very weak coordinator candidate and as a ridiculously weak HC candidate and he played to exactly that level..

Shanahan will most certainly NOT put up with anything like that-- especially since Vinny is gone, and Snyder has soured on Campbell..

if Shanahan actually thinks that Campbell is the best option for 2010, we will find a way to keep him.. i think it is under 10 % we see that happen.. best guess ? we sign Pennington or some other caretaker for 1 year or less and draft someone Shanahan wants to develop

shally

12-31-2009, 11:00 PM

Agreed, but not just that: why would Campbell stay in any event unless we were paying him WAY too much money. After last offseason when we flirted with every QB, it was clear that the skins decided to replace him.

why would he stay ?

A. we actually offer him more money than anyone else
B. someone offers him more money, but the Redskins and that team cannot agree on compensation (JC will sign with someone else and the commish will fix the compensation and JC WILL play elsewhere)
C. NOBODY matches the tender offer.. what other options will JC have except to sit out ??

MadDog97

01-01-2010, 12:58 AM

You, and so many others ... including TV commentators continue to exaggerate greatly, "all of these systems" JC has been forced to learn. The reality is that JC has played in exactly TWO systems in 4 years ... not three, not four, not twelve ... TWO.

:smash:

2005: Campbell is drafted by Gibbs and learns Gibbs system

2006: Jan Al Saunders joins the Skin. Brunell is benched and Campbell starts. Campbell uses Saunders system.

2007: Campbell plays under Saunder's system.

2008: Gibbs retires and Zorn replaces him as coach. Campbell learns Zorn's west coast system.

2009: Sherman Lewis leaves the Bingo parlor and calls the offensive plays.

OK, I will reduce the count to he had to learn 3 systems (Gibbs, Saunders, and Zorn). However, my main complaints are twofold: the offensive line has stunk and he is a bad match for the west coast. My main point of irritation is that he lacks the intelligence to be an effective QB that he is regularly accused of. If he has too slow a release that is a legitimate claim, but not that the he lack the intelligence to be an NFL QB.

Having said all that, it is a good idea for him to move on and to let the Skins break in a new QB. However, no QB will survive our current offensive line so that is where we need to draft (for about the last 6 years; thanks Vinnie).

Vinnie and Danny have demonstrated the inability to obtain players that fit the system. Jason Taylor and Albert Haynesworth are the latest examples.

akhhorus

01-01-2010, 01:14 AM

No, I'm saying he didn't play in a different system every year with the Redskins, as is constantly claimed. If I had a dollar for every time I've heard that all Campbell needs is two years in the same system .... yet he's had that TWICE. He played in one system ... Saunders system ... in 2006 and 2007, and then Zorn's in 2008, 2009, contrary to those who claim he's never had a chance to learn a system.

This has nothing to do with anything I've said.

I'm not making anything up ... I'm just speculating.

No, you're making it up. You don't have any speculation that Campbell was the cause for the OCs being fired at all.

As for the 2004 Auburn team's success, I think it had a little SOMETHING to do with Ronnie Brown & Cadillac Williams both having great years, and drafted 2nd and 5th overall in the 2005 NFL 1st round!!! In 2004 ... Auburn ran for more TDs (27) than they did passing (25) (Campbell had 20), and that team relied heavily on their running game, making Campbell's job much easier. Brown and Williams were not there in 2005 either. Think they might have been missed? And just ask yourself how many College football teams have two running backs that are both picked in the top 5 spots of the draft in the same year? I don't know the answer, but I'd bet it doesn't happen very often.

This has nothing to do with anything I've said. And they had Brown, Williams and Brandon Jacobs one year..and still fired their OC after that season.

My analogy makes perfect sense if you were to fairly apply the excuse machine.

Your analogy only works if you decide that logic doesn't apply.

How much NFL experience Brunell had doesn't negate the complexity of Saunders offense one bit ... an offense Brunell was given only training camp to learn. But more importantly ... and this is an issue that REALLY IRKS ME, is that it was not just Brunell that had to learn this new offense, it was the entire offensive team that had to learn it too ... receivers, running backs, o-linemen and all of the pass routs, blocking assignments and protections, etc. So if anything, one could speculate that the entire supporting cast was better prepared to execute the offense later in the year with Campbell than they were in the first few games, as they too were learning the new system.

Nothing you say here has anything to do with the point at hand.

Surely, after 16 games in 2006, along with a full off season of study, and 2007, the supporting cast understood the offense better than they did during the first few games when it was brand new?

But, and I don't know why I'm bothering to ask you to make basic logical conclusions, you had a young Qb learning his 2nd system in as many NFL seasons to come in and salvage a bad season. If you're expecting him to come in and fix everything-even with the rest of the offense with a few extra weeks to learn the offense(nevermind that Campbell had as much time to learn the offense also)-then your expectations are unrealistic...or you're willing to say anything to criticize Campbell over.

Yet the offense regressed, scoring less points ... until Collins came in and proved that the receivers were not too short, knew their routs and where they should be, and the line was not as horrible as some people made the out to be after all.

I've explained why you're fabricating this "Collins was the savior" myth.

No you did' ent The stats for Collins are so in enormously superior that I don't know how you can say that with a straight face!

I've posted the stats, you've shown that you'll say anything regardless how divorced from reality to push your narrative, but I've posted the stats and you're ignoring them.

First, the Chicago game ... Collins put 24 points on the board, threw 15/20 (that's 75% in case your math is rusty) 224 yards, 2 TDs and zero ints in just over 33 minutes (1/2 game). Those are numbers Campbell rarely achieves in an entire game ... but in the Chicago game, it was even worse ... something like 90 yards, no points, and several 3 and outs.

Even factoring in that game in the stats I posted, Campbell still looks better.

Now let's also address the "that's because Portis remembered how to run" nonsense .... Portis finished the Chicago game with a WHOPPING 36 yards on 17 carries (2.1 yards per attempt), and though I haven't checked, I'd bet that is one of the worst games, if not THE WORST game Portis has ever had, be it in Washington or Denver.

Portis had 86 yards receiving in that game, so you're wrong again.

So consider your debunking, debunked.

Except that you didn't check your facts(again).

The fact that Collins averaged over 250 per game (888 yards in 3.5 games), 64% comp, 5 TDs 0 ints, and a QB rating of 106.4 (the highest QB rating of any QB in the league over those last 4 games proved that the Chicago game was not a fluke, as so many wanted to do after the game.

And Campbell was averaging 260 yards per game in the 4 full games before he got hurt in 2007 with 6 Tds. So, Collins didn't represent that much of an upgrade.

He also threw a TD that Davis dropped. And just what was he supposed to do after that? He was on the bench. What a bum ... he did little else ... from the sideline.

He also threw a pass that went about 2 feet because he clutched it wrong.

Once again, the double standard. When the offense falls on it's face with Campbell, it's the other 10 guys that are at fault ... but if Collins comes in and doesn't throw a TD pass on every series, he's useless? OK, I see your point.

Are you able to read english, because I didn't say anything in the part you're responding in that could possibly have anything to do with what you're talking about.

Uhhhh, no. There goes this exaggeration thing again. Not ten years, or eight, or even 6 years ... Saunders was only in KC for a total of 5 years, and Collins never started a game in it until 2007 with the Redskins.

7 years actually. 2001-2007.

Facts seems to be something you are confusing with opinions. The facts are, Collins did play circles around Campbell, statistically across the board in the areas most important ... Yards, TD's, and Wins. Campbell, going into the Bears game was on a 4 game losing streak (0-4), and Collins finished the year 4-0.

I've pointed why you're wrong about the yards/TDs, and you didn't actually watch those 4 games if you think Campbell was responsible for the 4 losses: the Defense blew the Dallas/Philly games and the Defense/Gibbs blew the Buffalo game. Campbell had a bad Tampa game, while Collins had Portis taking over.

Don't worry, I don't expect a relevant comment from you on this.

Clearly, starter level talent? Clearly? The only thing clear is that Campbell requires ideal circumstances in order to be successful, but in the NFL, rarely are circumstances ideal, and even more rarely do teams not suffer injuries.

Campbell requires time to throw. He hasn't had that since Samuels got hurt in 2008, and shocker: his stats have been in a deep decline since then.

But saying Campbell struggles with some facets of the game is rather funny ... yeah, he struggles to score points, and and loses more games than he wins. Are those the facets you are referring to? Points and Winning?

Campbell bears some responsibility, but he's not to blame when the defense decides to let up late scores and that's happened far too many times with this team under Zorn.

And they are the only receivers in the NFL that drop passes ... all of the other QBs never have dropped passes?

Moss has led the league in drops(or been in the top 5 in them) every year since 2007 I believe. Randle El has been high on that list as well. All the other qbs don't have WRs who have that distinction, do they?

No, not selective, just a stat conveniently overlooked when discussing Campbell's yards and completion %, as if those stats actually win games. I use this stat ... TDs thrown between the 50-20 yard line because it's a good measure of a QB's skill and ability to execute one of their most important functions .. that is to throw TD passes. Anyone can hand the ball off to a running back, and most can manage a 5 yard dump off pass, neither of which takes a great deal of skill or accuracy.

No, its a selective stat use. If you want to discuss TD passes with an average yardage per one, feel free to show it. Deciding on a random stat of TD passes between a certain yardage is just putting your finger on the scale. I'm sure I could find some obscure Qbing stat where Campbell looked as good as Peyton Manning and declare that I thought it was the most important stat when it came to NFL Qbing.

That Campbell hasn't done it even once in two full seasons is particularly noteworthy and troubling ... so I noted it. It's one of those statistics that directly challenge this notion that he "Clearly has starter level talent". Find me another starting QB that has played two years and hasn't thrown a TD pass from that area of the field in two years.

I'm not aware of anyone who keeps track of that stat, if you have a site that does, feel free to show it so we can compare. Otherwise, you're asking me to disprove a negative and refuses to provide your stat.

Never said you did, but if you just look down to your next comment, you do insinuate ... ...

Not at all. Just using selective stats like you were doing to show the absurdity of it.

This is in response to the stuff I hear all the time about how no QB could be expected to succeed with the Redskin's o-line ... I just used Rogers as an example that a bad o-line is no excuse for abject failure on the part of the QB. Rogers ranks 4th in the league, yet his 0-line gives up more sacks than the Redskins line does.

He does have a poor line(to be fair, Green Bay passes the ball far more and only has 6 more sacks than the Skins' line does), but he has great WRs and great offensive coaching. Campbell has a terrible Oline, terrible WRs and terrible coaching.

It's amazing how GOOD Campbell is with such a lousy team around him, isn't it? See, this is the blatant contradiction that is repeated so often ... Campbell doesn't succeed because the team he's on is terrible, only to turn right around and show how these statistics prove he's good.

I didn't say that those stats prove anything. I was showing how selective stat use is useless.

Has the thought ever occurred to you that his completion percentage should be good since 25% of his passes are thrown BEHIND THE LINE OF SCRIMMAGE? Since these passes behind the line should be completed close to 100%, that would mean that his completion % past the line is roughly 48%.

See above. And I guess QBs that throw a lot of screens(which the Skins don't do since Lewis took over) should get the same criticism from you?

See, this is the deal. I don't blame Campbell for all of what is wrong with the Redskins offense.

Honestly, I don't believe you at all when you say something like that.

He's just a big part of it. The Campbell apologists are the ones who want to claim that he's some kind of victim.

It is undeniable that the Skins have not provided him the tools to do the job. This doesn't exonerate Campbell's share of the blame in the offensive problems, but he's far from the only problem(or the biggest)

He's not a victim of anything other than his own inability to learn and grow better. He still exhibits the same problems he did from the very beginning, and much of the pass rush pressure he faces is because he's slow to read defenses and holds the ball too long. He rarely punishes defenses with big plays so they continue to blitz the daylights out of him. The majority of his passes are within 7 yards of the line, so defenses don't need to guard against any medium and deep threats, allowing them to stack the box and shut down both the running game while still protecting the short passing routs.

But if he doesn't have the time to go through his progressions and make deeper throws, how can any QB be expected to try and take advantage of blitzes to go deep? Campbell literally has no time to throw deep because the Oline can't pass block for longer than 2.5 seconds against a good pass rush. If you're expecting a Skins' Qb to be able to hit deep routes with 2-3 seconds to get back into his drop, look for his WRs, then make the throws, then you will always be disappointed.

If you understood football better, you'd understand the cause and effect here, and how Campbell's own shortcomings amplify the troubles on the line in both pass pro and run game. He's just not a very good QB.

When you show even a scintilla of any football knowledge other than your hard on for Campbell, you can say something like that.

Receivers don't throw the ball to themselves. Those receivers have to have a QB that gets them the ball. But if Campbell were in Green Bay, those guys wouldn't get that ... because they have such a bad o-line.

Except that Greg Jennings and Donald Driver are considered very good WRs for any QB they've played for.

And you can look at Santana's numbers from 2005 and then look at them since and see if anything, he is a victim of Campbell being the QB, not vice versa.

No, you're wrong about that. Moss' stats bounced back in 2008, but have dropped off because the Lewis decided to make Thomas the focus on the passing game.

No, I'm saying it isn't the system ... it's the QB. And we've seen enough to know that.

You can believe whatever you want to, no matter how wrong you are. We've seen a Qb who can thrive if he's allowed the time to throw and trusts his WRs. Not saying he's a pro bowl level player, but he clearly has talent.

Really ... Collins got an entire half? Wow. Well that proves it, doesn't it. A whole half.

Thanks for making yet another mindless, irrelevant comment since you can't actually discuss the issue.

As far as insane goes ... the definition of insane is doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.

And I'm not the only one who thinks benching Campbell would have been a good idea. Sonny said earlier this year that the Redskins would have been far better off starting Collins. I think Sonny knows a thing or two about being a QB ... no?

Sonny hasn't said that anymore since Collins actually got into a game I believe. I think that says a lot, no?

Hr fan

01-01-2010, 08:06 AM

anything in the range of 3-4 million per year is chump change for a QB, so the Skins will undoubtedly tender JC, even if they want to trade him

my guess is that they hope to get a second rounder for him.. that is all culpeper fetched and he had better record, even if it was abetted by Moss

+1. We tender JC at 1/3 level (still chump change) and if going in another direction talk trade for lesser return. On another post IMO the chances that JC is retained by the new coaching staff is far better than 10%, even if only as a backup. The decision will be made on what is available to suit his planned role, and as Akh points out the pickings are really slim. Last, JC would stay rather than sit out if that's the way it unwinds. Not only will he get compensation, but few players bond with the owner - they bond with teammates and the coaches, who will definitely be supportive if he is here.

PS IMO danny is an interfering sob, but he has almost always followed football advice. Unfortunately this advice came from an incompetent vindictive soul who is no longer here. If danny listens to his friend who is no longer here as he did when Marty was coach then all is lost, and we will never again get a reasonable HC candidate. However I truly believe that danny has learned his lesson at least for the immediate future, and the vinnie poison will be ignored and the friendship then will weaken over time.

GuyNTexas

01-01-2010, 12:17 PM

2005: Campbell is drafted by Gibbs and learns Gibbs system

2006: Jan Al Saunders joins the Skin. Brunell is benched and Campbell starts. Campbell uses Saunders system.

2007: Campbell plays under Saunder's system.

2008: Gibbs retires and Zorn replaces him as coach. Campbell learns Zorn's west coast system.

2009: Sherman Lewis leaves the Bingo parlor and calls the offensive plays.

OK, I will reduce the count to he had to learn 3 systems (Gibbs, Saunders, and Zorn). However, my main complaints are twofold: the offensive line has stunk and he is a bad match for the west coast. My main point of irritation is that he lacks the intelligence to be an effective QB that he is regularly accused of. If he has too slow a release that is a legitimate claim, but not that the he lack the intelligence to be an NFL QB.

Having said all that, it is a good idea for him to move on and to let the Skins break in a new QB. However, no QB will survive our current offensive line so that is where we need to draft (for about the last 6 years; thanks Vinnie).

Vinnie and Danny have demonstrated the inability to obtain players that fit the system. Jason Taylor and Albert Haynesworth are the latest examples.

One may argue semantics, but in 2005, he was little more than a pimple on a flea's behind, while Brunell was the starter and Ramsey was the 2nd. I'm sure Campbell was given a playbook to study, but to say he "learned" Gibbs system as the #3, is completely lacking credibility. That's just not how the #3 rookies are handled. Most of his first year with the Redskins was focused on mechanics, and film study, as is the case with #3's. There isn't enough time to do much else unless they're being groomed to start right away, in which case they'd be #2 on the depth chart.

But in reality, that he actually learned any of the systems is highly suspect, and I don't say this in rhetorical sense. They were still using training wheels on him in 2007 regarding Al's playbook.

My stance on this subject is in response to all of the many people who continue to claim that all JC ever needed was a chance to "play" in the same system for more than a year ... and I say he did, twice. That's the gist of my point.

I agree with you, and have consistently maintained that the WCO and Jason Campbell were a poor fit, given that the primary requirements of the WCO were Campbell's primary weaknesses. Yet, with the struggles he's had in accuracy throwing down field, I'm hard pressed to believe a more vertical offense would be his savior, given his 2006-2007 experience.

I'm of the opinion, and have maintained this consistently, that Campbell's weaknesses preclude him from being an effective QB in any system, and that his struggles have not been "system" related, but more fundamental.

I don't care what system you run, NFL QBs cannot hold the ball ... they cannot be slow to make decisions .. and they cannot lock in on targets ... hesitation = laceration in the NFL. The difference between a TD pass and a failed play can be 1/2 second. QBs have about 3 - 3.5 seconds to release the ball with good pass pro ... knock off a second with a blitz. That Campbell gets pressure on a three step drop shows not a poor o-line, but a slow QB. No way does a three step drop provide the depth for anything more than ... 3 steps ... plant ... release. (2 seconds)

It's easy to miss a slim second when watching a football game ... but put a stop watch on Campbell, and then do the same thing with some of the premier QBs in the league. Campbell takes a good second or so longer .. consistently ... and that's a big part of why the o-line looks so bad, and why he's under pressure so often. Don't get me wrong ... the o-line isn't great ..but they are not nearly as bad as Campbell's hesitation make them appear.

Remember, defenses can't hit the QB unless it's within a reasonable amount of time after the ball has been released. Hold the ball an extra 1/2 to 1 second, (as JC often does) and that's all that is needed to get knocked to the ground on any given pass play.

Just remember Hesitation=Laceration ... Campbell isn't a victim of anything other than his own inability to adapt to the speed of the NFL.

And yes ... another QB with quicker instincts could do better ... even with the current o-line.

BurgundyNGold

01-01-2010, 02:11 PM

I'm far from an advocate or a detractor of Campbell's at this point but here is some food for thought:

1) Folks want to use the OL injuries as an excuse for why Campbell isn't playing well. But, really, isn't he playing comparatively his best football? By the numbers, his stats are up across the board this season -- including career highs in TD passes (18), [yards (3337),] completion percentage (64.3%), yards/completion (7.2) and QB rating (85.0). Isn't that growth behind the dock workers who constitute our current OL? If he did this well after absorbing 44 sacks and 90 hits behind one of the worst OL in Redskins history, we have to give him some credit.

2) The offensive system argument is TV commentator fodder, just like Greg Blache's Nth ranked defense in yards, points allowed or whatever mindless stat they can use to make the Redskins seem competitive before they ultimately get their dicks knocked in the dirt. Football is football. As a QB, you're supposed to be the field general. If not in Pattenesque leadership, at least in knowing the offensive systems. As far as I'm concerned, after playing in 25322354+e01 systems, Campbell should be the effing Kasparov of offensive football. There should be nothing he hasn't seen or done before. He should be that much more well rounded for the experience. But the reality is that he still can't identify a coverage or a corner blitz regardless of the system he's in. That shouldn't be ignored either.

Carry on, gents and ladies.

[edit]

akhhorus

01-01-2010, 02:27 PM

I'm far from an advocate or a detractor of Campbell's at this point but here is some food for thought:

No comment lol

1) Folks want to use the OL injuries as an excuse for why Campbell isn't playing well. But, really, isn't he playing comparatively his best football? By the numbers, his stats are up across the board this season -- including career highs in TD passes (18), completion percentage (64.3%), yards/completion (7.2) and QB rating (85.0). Isn't that growth behind the dock workers who constitute our current OL? If he did this well after absorbing 44 sacks and 90 hits behind one of the worst OL in Redskins history, we have to give him some credit.

I don't know if I would call it growth, but his YPA(which is a measure of efficiency and wouldn't be effected by sack numbers) being high shows that he has ability(we can quibble on how much his talent is). Campbell's split stats(Link (http://www.nfl.com/players/jasoncampbell/situationalstats?id=CAM375235)) show that he's really good when he's down big(which would explain the high sack/hit numbers also) or when they're tied. Being good when the skins are down big might suggest that he's effective when teams drop into zone and blitz with a lead, but his stats when tied are fairly good which would suggest that he's not limited to that. They also show that Campbell's at his best when they have him throw the ball over 22 times and that he's very good inside the red zone(16 tds in 37 completions).

2) The offensive system argument is TV commentator fodder, just like Greg Blache's Nth ranked defense in yards, points allowed or whatever mindless stat they can use to make the Redskins seem competitive before they ultimately get their dicks knocked in the dirt. Football is football. As a QB, you're supposed to be the field general. If not in Pattenesque leadership, at least in knowing the offensive systems. As far as I'm concerned, after playing in 25322354+e01 systems, Campbell should be the effing Kasparov of offensive football. There should be nothing he hasn't seen or done before. He should be that much more well rounder for the experience.

That assumes that he can easily pick up a system after short exposure to it. I don't know of many Qbs who aren't seasoned vets could do that on a consistent basis.

But the reality is that he still can't identify a coverage or a corner blitz regardless of the system he's in. That shouldn't be ignored either.

I'd like to know how much Dallas corner blitzed this year, Michaels said that they do it the least in the NFL and while Campbell should have picked it up, it was a blind side rush using a tactic that the skins probably weren't expecting at all. Thats good defensive coaching, while Blache's idea of an adjustment is to have the DBs playing a 6 yard cushion on 3rd and 2 instead of an 8 yard one lol.

BurgundyNGold

01-01-2010, 02:39 PM

No comment lol
When he does well, I give him credit. But if he's inaccurate, too conservative or just not very good, I'm not an ostrich about it. Campbell is an enigma, but he's an enigma that's starting to coalesce.

I don't know if I would call it growth, but his YPA(which is a measure of efficiency and wouldn't be effected by sack numbers) being high shows that he has ability(we can quibble on how much his talent is). Campbell's split stats(Link (http://www.nfl.com/players/jasoncampbell/situationalstats?id=CAM375235)) show that he's really good when he's down big(which would explain the high sack/hit numbers also) or when they're tied. Being good when the skins are down big might suggest that he's effective when teams drop into zone and blitz with a lead, but his stats when tied are fairly good which would suggest that he's not limited to that. They also show that Campbell's at his best when they have him throw the ball over 22 times and that he's very good inside the red zone(16 tds in 37 completions).
With no running game to speak of and a talking monkey serving as HC and creating the offensive system, I have to say that his numbers show definite improvement. He's managed to be middle of the pack among QB (17th in QB rating) on an offense is 23rd in yards, 26th in points and 27th in rushing. While these numbers don't supports that Campbell is the answer to the Redskins offensive woes, they far from suggest he is the biggest problem.

That assumes that he can easily pick up a system after short exposure to it. I don't know of many Qbs who aren't seasoned vets could do that on a consistent basis.
He's a QB, that's part of the job description. It's not all about passing and scrambling. My biggest concern about Campbell has never been his arm, his legs or even his release. It's been what's between his ears. I don't think he's stupid, far from it. I just don't know that his synapses fire early and often enough to be a top level QB at this level without a LOT of repetition. I don't think the offensive system has a whole lot to do with that, either. Or, at least, it shouldn't for a prospective NFL level QB.

I'd like to know how much Dallas corner blitzed this year, Michaels said that they do it the least in the NFL and while Campbell should have picked it up, it was a blind side rush using a tactic that the skins probably weren't expecting at all. Thats good defensive coaching, while Blache's idea of an adjustment is to have the DBs playing a 6 yard cushion on 3rd and 2 instead of an 8 yard one lol.
Show me one example in his 4 or 5 years here where Campbell pointed out a blitzer -- from anywhere -- and I'll adjust my view. Absent that, the corner blitz example I cite is a symptom of a larger problem, not a distinct problem in a capsule.

edit: BTW, are these the same announcers who go on and on about how awesome Greg Blache's defese is? Clearly, we shouldn't be listening to them. At all. I keep expecting Jerry Lawler to start providing commentary at some some point lol.

akhhorus

01-01-2010, 02:44 PM

When he does well, I give him credit. But if he's inaccurate, too conservative or just not very good, I'm not an ostrich about it. Campbell is an enigma, but he's an enigma that's starting to coalesce.

I don't think he's that much of an enigma. He's a B level QB who can look like a B+ one if he gets time to throw.

With no running game to speak of and a talking monkey serving as HC and creating the offensive system, I have to say that his numbers show definite improvement. He's managed to be middle of the pack among QB (17th in QB rating) on an offense is 23rd in yards, 26th in points and 27th in rushing. While these numbers don't supports that Campbell is the answer to the Redskins offensive woes, they far from suggest he is the biggest problem.

I can agree with that.

He's a QB, that's part of the job description. It's not all about passing and scrambling. My biggest concern about Campbell has never been his arm, his legs or even his release. It's been what's between his ears. I don't think he's stupid, far from it. I just don't know that his synapses fire early and often enough to be a top level QB at this level without a LOT of repetition. I don't think the offensive system has a whole lot to do with that, either. Or, at least, it shouldn't for a prospective NFL level QB.

I think its more about trust with Campbell. When he had Davis/Thomas/The Sherminator to work with, he looked much better because he clearly trusts them(especially Thomas). I don't think it's a coincidence that Campbell was enjoying a resurgence until Thomas turned his ankle. When it was Moss/Zorn/Randle El, Campbell was gunshy.

Show me one example in his 4 or 5 years here where Campbell pointed out a blitzer -- from anywhere -- and I'll adjust my view. Absent that, the corner blitz example I cite is a symptom of a larger problem, not a distinct problem in a capsule.

I'm going to assume that somewhere in the thousand or so snaps he took passing the ball in 08 and 09 he actually pointed out a blitzer coming. Just because he didn't do that on that one play means he's never done that.

edit: BTW, are these the same announcers who go on and on about how awesome Greg Blache's defese is? Clearly, we shouldn't be listening to them. At all. I keep expecting Jerry Lawler to start providing commentary at some some point lol.

I think there's a difference between sucking Blache's teats and saying that team X did tactic Y the least in the NFL so far.

BIGREDSKINSFAN1963

01-01-2010, 03:52 PM

i'm amazed that 15 games into the season JC has'nt ended up in traction at dc general.got to give him credit for being tough enough to stick it out all season with the weekly beatings he's taken.

tuckahoeskin

01-01-2010, 04:27 PM

Blache's idea of an adjustment is to have the DBs playing a 6 yard cushion on 3rd and 2 instead of an 8 yard one lol.

I honestly think Blache's idea of an adjustment is to shift his weight from his left foot to his right.

GuyNTexas

01-01-2010, 05:47 PM

Enough of the tit for tat nonsense. I'll not waste too much more time trying to address your rhetorical, pointless comments, but I will address a couple of the coherent, albeit demonstrably false points:

But, and I don't know why I'm bothering to ask you to make basic logical conclusions, you had a young Qb learning his 2nd system in as many NFL seasons to come in and salvage a bad season. If you're expecting him to come in and fix everything-even with the rest of the offense with a few extra weeks to learn the offense(nevermind that Campbell had as much time to learn the offense also)-then your expectations are unrealistic...or you're willing to say anything to criticize Campbell over.

What Campbell did in 2006 is actually better than anything he's done since. And my critique of him has nothing to do with any unfulfilled expectations in 2006.

His measurable decline in TD production 2007 is the point here, and shouldn't be so difficult to grasp. That he had all of the 2006 season, plus 7 games of experience, coupled with full preparation in the offseason as the starter going into 2007 would, to any reasonable mind, offer some expectation of improved production in 2007. It didn't happen.

In fact, as of mid-season 2007, the Redskins were the only team in the NFL that had not thrown a TD pass to a WR. A very troubling statistic for what is supposed to be a strong armed, down field throwing machine.

I've explained why you're fabricating this "Collins was the savior" myth.

I've posted the stats, you've shown that you'll say anything regardless how divorced from reality to push your narrative, but I've posted the stats and you're ignoring them.

And Campbell was averaging 260 yards per game in the 4 full games before he got hurt in 2007 with 6 Tds. So, Collins didn't represent that much of an upgrade.

In 2007, comparing side by side, Jason Campbell's stats to Collins 2007 stats, Collins beats him in EVERY CATEGORY WITHOUT EXCEPTION ... Compl %, Yrds/g, Ave yard/c, TD %, QB rating; 40+ yarders, 20+ yarders, anything you can measure ... Collins beats him, hands down.

Now you are quick to cite selectiveness ... yet you want to ignore Campbell's previous 8 games and cite only stats for 4 games to compare to Collins? OK

Here's a little analysis of these games leading up to the Bears that you claim were so good for Campbell ...

Philly-Campbell threw 3 TDs (good game, for most of the game, until Campbell fumbles, and Philly recovers inside the Redskin 20, to ice the game with 2:20 on the clock leading by 1). Also of particular note was that Campbell threw his first TD pass to a WR all season in this 9th game of the year.

Dallas-2 (good game until that horrible pick in the red zone as we were in perfect position to win the game with 1 min on the clock),

Tampa Bay-1, In the Bucs game, he threw for 301 yards ... yet the Redskins scored only 13 points and they lost .. 16-13. How do you throw for 301 yards and fail to score 14 points? Cuz you don't throw TD passes. Three long drives in the second half resulted in no points ... which has become a trademark of Jason Campbell. He also threw two horrible picks in that game, the last one, an end zone pick from the red zone at the end, sealing the victory for TB.

Buffalo game-0, he fails to throw a single TD, and gets nailed for a safety, throws a pick, and fumbles against a Buffalo team that was ranked 31st in defense. Again, we lose, in spite of multiple opportunities to ice the game leading at one point 16-5.

Chicago-0, Up until being injured the Redskin offense couldn't get anything on the board and the game was headed toward a 5th straight loss. Collins comes in and throws 2 TDs, 224 yards in just over a half game. Redskins win.

In each of those games you cite as statistically better than Collins, Campbell contributes crucial turnovers that lead directly to each loss ... a fumble, leading to Philly's game icing score, and red zone picks in the final minutes against Dallas, Tampa Bay, and Buffalo.

I've pointed why you're wrong about the yards/TDs, and you didn't actually watch those 4 games if you think Campbell was responsible for the 4 losses: the Defense blew the Dallas/Philly games and the Defense/Gibbs blew the Buffalo game. Campbell had a bad Tampa game, while Collins had Portis taking over.

Don't worry, I don't expect a relevant comment from you on this.

I just did, but to reiterate, who threw the passes to Portis? Collins. Who threw the TD to Yoder? Collins. Who threw the TD to Betts? Collins.

The fumble that Philly recovered inside the Redskin 20 was on Campbell, not the defense.

The Pick Campbell threw in the Red zone against Dallas at the end of the game was Campbell, not the defense.

The defense virtually shut down Buffalo all game long ... it was the offense/Campbell that couldn't get it done against the 2nd worst defense in the NFL, 1 fumble, 1 pick, one safety ... ALL on Campbell.

Campbell requires time to throw. He hasn't had that since Samuels got hurt in 2008, and shocker: his stats have been in a deep decline since then.

So, one player gets hurt, and you cancel the season? Is that it?

Look, stop talking and start learning ... go get yourself a stop watch and time successful plays and unsuccessful plays in the passing game of any team. On average, you have about 3 seconds to release the ball, take any longer and trouble happens.

Now go to the Chicago game highlights, and do the same thing. When Campbell gets injured, he released the ball 4 seconds after the snap. It was complete, but he was crushed. Had he released the ball sooner, he wouldn't have been clobbered. The same happened to Collins when the ball was stripped from him in the pocket ... held it a second too long. Now check the 2 TD passes, and the long gainer to Portis ... ALL THREE passes were released in 3 seconds or less. GO CHECK IT YOURSELF.

No, its a selective stat use. If you want to discuss TD passes with an average yardage per one, feel free to show it. Deciding on a random stat of TD passes between a certain yardage is just putting your finger on the scale. I'm sure I could find some obscure Qbing stat where Campbell looked as good as Peyton Manning and declare that I thought it was the most important stat when it came to NFL Qbing.

Don't be ridiculous. TD passes from the opponents territory between the 50 and 20 yard line is in the NFL situational statistics for a reason, just as TD passes inside the red zone is significant. Which do you think gives a better measure of a QBs ability to throw TD passes ... 20+ yard TDs or TDs from inside the red zone? And what has been the biggest problem the Redskins offense has had the past few years? Scoring points. Stalling drives, and kicking FGs instead of TDs. When you see that Campbell has not thrown a SINGLE TD between the 50 and 20 yard line in two seasons, it's a good indicator of why this scoring problem exists. Throwing TDs from your own 20 yard line isn't what is considered scoring territory ... but when you are in your opponent's territory it is considered scoring territory. Can you not grasp this very basic concept?

I'm not aware of anyone who keeps track of that stat, if you have a site that does, feel free to show it so we can compare. Otherwise, you're asking me to disprove a negative and refuses to provide your stat.

Situational stats. NFL.COM

But if he doesn't have the time to go through his progressions and make deeper throws, how can any QB be expected to try and take advantage of blitzes to go deep? Campbell literally has no time to throw deep because the Oline can't pass block for longer than 2.5 seconds against a good pass rush. If you're expecting a Skins' Qb to be able to hit deep routes with 2-3 seconds to get back into his drop, look for his WRs, then make the throws, then you will always be disappointed.

Once again, I've seen Campbell miss wide open receivers down filed when he has been given plenty of time to throw ... several times this year alone. If you say he hasn't, you're not being honest.

Except that Greg Jennings and Donald Driver are considered very good WRs for any QB they've played for.

Yeah, Brett Favre, and Aaron Rogers. Are you trying to be funny here? Because you really are QUITE FUNNY.

You can believe whatever you want to, no matter how wrong you are. We've seen a Qb who can thrive if he's allowed the time to throw and trusts his WRs. Not saying he's a pro bowl level player, but he clearly has talent.

One must ignore the following to believe this bologna:

1) Campbell has NEVER won a game in the final plays ... he throws pick or fumbles at crunch time.

2) Campbell's inability to ice games when leading has let inferior opponents hand around, climb back into games, and win in the end NUMEROUS times over the past three seasons.

3) Campbell's vision down field is atrocious, often having open receivers that he never even sees.

4) His accuracy, even on short throws is terrible, making catches much more difficult, and reduces YAC which the WCO relies on. That's why you see so many passes that wind up 2 yards shy of a first down.

5) Even when he does complete a deep ball, they are most often severely under-thrown, allowing the defender to close and make a tackle. Campbell RARELY hits receivers in stride, which is why the poor TD numbers from outside the red zone (in case you're still wondering about the significance of that 50-20 yard line statistic that you THINK is so obscure and meaningless.)

Bottom line is that Campbell still struggles with fundamentals. At this stage of his career, he should be honing those skills that separate the Good QBs from the also played QB. His pocket awareness is that of a rookie still, 4 seasons later. His accuracy on both short and deep throws is extremely inconsistent. He holds the ball too long ... takes forever to make a decision .. locks in on a target which allows safeties (who watch the QBs eyes) to make breaks and defend the deeper routs, that often relegate Campbell to dump off passes.

You can put perfume on a pig ... but it is what it is. A pig with perfume.

After 4 years as a starter, you get what you get with Campbell ... a very mediocre QB that requires ideal situations to be moderately successful. He had one good year in college, and three mediocre years. The one good year he had was aided by the fact that his team had two top 5 NFL pick RBs carrying the team all year. And every weakness that was identified in Campbell's college scouting report is a mirror image of his NFL scouting report today ... meaning he has not learned ... he has not grown ... he' still slow.

He is what he is.

BIGREDSKINSFAN1963

01-01-2010, 05:55 PM

i would like to see him comeback and play behind a line that can actually block.
the so called line that he's playing behind now could'nt make any other team but this one.:devil2:

BurgundyNGold

01-01-2010, 07:00 PM

I'm going to assume that somewhere in the thousand or so snaps he took passing the ball in 08 and 09 he actually pointed out a blitzer coming. Just because he didn't do that on that one play means he's never done that.
OK, well, I'm going to let you get back to that other discussion. I only point it out because I can never remember him ever having pointed out a blitz.

akhhorus

01-01-2010, 07:43 PM

Enough of the tit for tat nonsense. I'll not waste too much more time trying to address your rhetorical, pointless comments, but I will address a couple of the coherent, albeit demonstrably false points:

You probably should spend less time trying to describe your own posts thinking I wrote them.

What Campbell did in 2006 is actually better than anything he's done since. And my critique of him has nothing to do with any unfulfilled expectations in 2006.

No, you were trying to use his 2006 performance as some supposed proof that he's incapable of running an offense, when I pointed out the falseness of your crap, you've now switched to another criteria.

His measurable decline in TD production 2007 is the point here, and shouldn't be so difficult to grasp. That he had all of the 2006 season, plus 7 games of experience, coupled with full preparation in the offseason as the starter going into 2007 would, to any reasonable mind, offer some expectation of improved production in 2007. It didn't happen.

Too bad Campbell improved from 06 to 07 in QB rating, int rate, yards per game, yards per attempt, wins, wins percentage and completion percentage. I can't say I'm surprised that you're cherry picking the one stat he dropped in.

In fact, as of mid-season 2007, the Redskins were the only team in the NFL that had not thrown a TD pass to a WR. A very troubling statistic for what is supposed to be a strong armed, down field throwing machine.

Or the WRs sucked and blew in 2007. Considering that Moss didn't have a 100 yard game until he caught a TD pass in week 11, and he had 5 games of that first 11 weeks with 118 total receiving yards(and Campbell's yards per game was over 200 in those games), it looks like thats more on the WRs.

In 2007, comparing side by side, Jason Campbell's stats to Collins 2007 stats, Collins beats him in EVERY CATEGORY WITHOUT EXCEPTION ... Compl %, Yrds/g, Ave yard/c, TD %, QB rating; 40+ yarders, 20+ yarders, anything you can measure ... Collins beats him, hands down.

Now you are quick to cite selectiveness ... yet you want to ignore Campbell's previous 8 games and cite only stats for 4 games to compare to Collins? OK

I didn't bring it up, you wanted to claim that Collins came in and magically improved the passing game. Pointing out the same amount of games leading up to Campbell's injury is showing equivalence. I can't say I'm surprised that you struggle to grasp this concept, when I pointed out Collins/Campbell's performance in the same game in 2009 you didn't understand why I brought it up.

Here's a little analysis of these games leading up to the Bears that you claim were so good for Campbell ...

Philly-Campbell threw 3 TDs (good game, for most of the game, until Campbell fumbles, and Philly recovers inside the Redskin 20, to ice the game with 2:20 on the clock leading by 1). Also of particular note was that Campbell threw his first TD pass to a WR all season in this 9th game of the year.

You didn't actually watch this game or you're lying to push your narrative. Anyone who is being honest or actually watched that game would know that the defense gave up 3 tds in the final 9 minutes of game time. I'm sure you have convinced yourself that this is Campbell's fault somehow, but no one should actually believe you.

Dallas-2 (good game until that horrible pick in the red zone as we were in perfect position to win the game with 1 min on the clock),

I guess it was Jason Campbell's fault that Williams put Reed Doughty on TO and gave up 4 TDs, forcing the skins to get into a 4 minute offense in the late 3rd quarter?

Tampa Bay-1, In the Bucs game, he threw for 301 yards ... yet the Redskins scored only 13 points and they lost .. 16-13. How do you throw for 301 yards and fail to score 14 points? Cuz you don't throw TD passes. Three long drives in the second half resulted in no points ... which has become a trademark of Jason Campbell. He also threw two horrible picks in that game, the last one, an end zone pick from the red zone at the end, sealing the victory for TB.

You throw for 301 and get 13 points when Portis and Moss fumble away the ball three times.

Buffalo game-0, he fails to throw a single TD, and gets nailed for a safety, throws a pick, and fumbles against a Buffalo team that was ranked 31st in defense. Again, we lose, in spite of multiple opportunities to ice the game leading at one point 16-5.

Campbell did his job, the defense and Gibbs screwed up royally on the final drive.

In each of those games you cite as statistically better than Collins, Campbell contributes crucial turnovers that lead directly to each loss ... a fumble, leading to Philly's game icing score, and red zone picks in the final minutes against Dallas, Tampa Bay, and Buffalo.

I've pointed out the nonsense of your opinions here.

I just did

No, you just made posts that show that you didn't watch the games in questions or are conveniently forgetting what actually happened in those games.

, but to reiterate, who threw the passes to Portis? Collins. Who threw the TD to Yoder? Collins. Who threw the TD to Betts? Collins.

The pass to Portis was 1 yard long pass behind the line that Portis ran for over 50 yards on, it would be nice if you were consistent in your criticisms since you wanted to dump on Campbell for getting credit for the same thing, no?

The fumble that Philly recovered inside the Redskin 20 was on Campbell, not the defense.

The 21 points the Eagles ripped off in 9 minutes is on the defense.

The Pick Campbell threw in the Red zone against Dallas at the end of the game was Campbell, not the defense.

The 4 td passes that the defense gave up are on the defense, forcing the offense to get desperate.

The defense virtually shut down Buffalo all game long ... it was the offense/Campbell that couldn't get it done against the 2nd worst defense in the NFL, 1 fumble, 1 pick, one safety ... ALL on Campbell.

And the loss was on the defense giving up a late drive to Trent Edwards and Gibbs calling 2 timeouts.

So, one player gets hurt, and you cancel the season? Is that it?

Your pathetic attempt at sarcasm aside, the impact of losing a hall of fame level left tackle is shown in the stats. You probably don't want to admit that, but the stats are what the stats are.

Look, stop talking and start learning

Until you show that the limits of your football knowledge are selective memory and agenda pushing, don't think that you can try to lecture me.

... go get yourself a stop watch and time successful plays and unsuccessful plays in the passing game of any team. On average, you have about 3 seconds to release the ball, take any longer and trouble happens.

Thats not true. I'm watching the Rose bowl right now and each Qb has 4-7 seconds to throw. Against Dallas last sunday night Campbell had less than 3 seconds about 15-20 times.

Now go to the Chicago game highlights, and do the same thing. When Campbell gets injured, he released the ball 4 seconds after the snap. It was complete, but he was crushed. Had he released the ball sooner, he wouldn't have been clobbered. The same happened to Collins when the ball was stripped from him in the pocket ... held it a second too long. Now check the 2 TD passes, and the long gainer to Portis ... ALL THREE passes were released in 3 seconds or less. GO CHECK IT YOURSELF.

Collins had 4 seconds to throw on the Yoder TD pass. The long gainer to portis was a flair/screen, not a deep ball, thats supposed to come out in 2 seconds or less. The Betts TD was a 3 step drop, if the Qb holds on for longer than 3 seconds, it means the play is broken by the defense. For someone who wants to lecture about knowing the basics about football, you should have known that...

Don't be ridiculous. TD passes from the opponents territory between the 50 and 20 yard line is in the NFL situational statistics for a reason, just as TD passes inside the red zone is significant. Which do you think gives a better measure of a QBs ability to throw TD passes ... 20+ yard TDs or TDs from inside the red zone? And what has been the biggest problem the Redskins offense has had the past few years? Scoring points. Stalling drives, and kicking FGs instead of TDs. When you see that Campbell has not thrown a SINGLE TD between the 50 and 20 yard line in two seasons, it's a good indicator of why this scoring problem exists. Throwing TDs from your own 20 yard line isn't what is considered scoring territory ... but when you are in your opponent's territory it is considered scoring territory. Can you not grasp this very basic concept?

Its not a basic concept, its you trying to push a narrative by using an obscure stat that Campbell looks bad in.

Situational stats. NFL.COM

Thats not what I asked for.

Once again, I've seen Campbell miss wide open receivers down filed when he has been given plenty of time to throw ... several times this year alone. If you say he hasn't, you're not being honest.

This has nothing to dow with what I said.

Funny that you didn't respond at all about my last comment about drops. Very telling.

Yeah, Brett Favre, and Aaron Rogers. Are you trying to be funny here? Because you really are QUITE FUNNY.

And both players are multiple pro bowlers who are considered top 15 WRs in the NFL. Campbell doesn't have a top 20 WR to throw to, only Rogers has a good young TE in Finley and several other effective WRs to throw to.

Not true. Campbell has led the skins to late scoring drives to win or tie the game only to see the defense give up a score in the ensuing drive.

[QUOTE=GuyNTexas;12879442] Campbell's inability to ice games when leading has let inferior opponents hand around, climb back into games, and win in the end NUMEROUS times over the past three seasons.

I've pointed out the nonsense of this concept of yours.

Campbell's vision down field is atrocious, often having open receivers that he never even sees.

And even when he is able to put his WRs in a position to make a play, they have a bad case of the drops. I don't expect you to make an honest response to this.

His accuracy, even on short throws is terrible, making catches much more difficult, and reduces YAC which the WCO relies on. That's why you see so many passes that wind up 2 yards shy of a first down.

His accuracy is actually pretty good(top ten in the NFL). You can believe whatever you want to I guess.

Even when he does complete a deep ball, they are most often severely under-thrown, allowing the defender to close and make a tackle. Campbell RARELY hits receivers in stride, which is why the poor TD numbers from outside the red zone (in case you're still wondering about the significance of that 50-20 yard line statistic that you THINK is so obscure and meaningless.)

That stat you want to keep waving still is still selective stat use from you. When a team has a poor Oline that can't block for 5 and 7 step drops, you can't throw the ball down the field. For someone who constantly wants to lecture about learning the basics of football, you should know that.

You can put perfume on a pig ... but it is what it is. A pig with perfume.

Not a good example since the "pig" in this case is dependent on the other pigs around him to do his job.

After 4 years as a starter, you get what you get with Campbell ... a very mediocre QB that requires ideal situations to be moderately successful.

His stats aren't of a mediocre QB no matter how much you want to selectively pluck out certain ones.

He is what he is.

Yes, but he's not the player you've decided he is lol

If you want to continue this, pm me. I'm not going to continue to junk up this thread with this back and forth between us.

44 goes 50 gut

01-01-2010, 07:43 PM

If you're looking for a QB this offseason, you have few options:
-draft(but its thin after Bradford)
-Campbell
-Chris Redman
-Trade for Leinart(and the 30 or so million left on his contract) or Brady Quinn(and the 30 or so million left on his contract).
-The corpses of Matt Hasselback or Jake Delhomme.
-Pennington coming off of a major shoulder/arm injury

Pretty thin pickings imo.

I agree, but with only a couple teams that seem certain to be interested in a mediocre veteran QB, and a couple teams that no one's 100% sure about, I don't think the demand is bigger than the market.

BTW I would be interested in Redman, he seems to have had a massive neck up adjustment, apparently when he actually had to do a normal job for a living he had a "moment of clarity" about how much fun practicing and watching film really were. Couple that with physical tools that were always there, and a couple good performances, he's interesting... not saying he'll have more interest than Campbell, or he's this years Cassels, but he's going to get a chance to win a starting job I think.

akhhorus

01-01-2010, 07:51 PM

I agree, but with only a couple teams that seem certain to be interested in a mediocre veteran QB, and a couple teams that no one's 100% sure about, I don't think the demand is bigger than the market.

This is speculation based on what I read from other fans and other beat writers(and places like Football outsiders, who thinks very highly of Jason Campbell this year), but I would bet safe money that the perception of Campbell in the rest of the league is much different than the one some skins fans do.

BTW I would be interested in Redman, he seems to have had a massive neck up adjustment, apparently when he actually had to do a normal job for a living he had a "moment of clarity" about how much fun practicing and watching film really were. Couple that with physical tools that were always there, and a couple good performances, he's interesting... not saying he'll have more interest than Campbell, or he's this years Cassels, but he's going to get a chance to win a starting job I think.

I wouldn't give him anything more than a 1 year deal. That Atlanta team, despite their results, is a well coached offense that got undermined by Turner's injury.

OK, well, I'm going to let you get back to that other discussion. I only point it out because I can never remember him ever having pointed out a blitz.

If memory serves, Rabach makes the blitz calls, not Campbell. Thats the way Buges has it I believe. But I'm also sure I've seen Campbell point out a blitzer on the edges before.

BurgundyNGold

01-01-2010, 07:57 PM

If memory serves, Rabach makes the blitz calls, not Campbell. Thats the way Buges has it I believe. But I'm also sure I've seen Campbell point out a blitzer on the edges before.
I understand that, but Campbell isn't a frigging statue. If he sees a blitzer he should call him out. Are you going to tell me that Campbell will be actively admonished if he calls out the blitzers to Rabach and the rest of the offense? If I point out that something that Campbell does or doesn't do that doesn't mean that he doesn't do more good things than bad. The guy has weaknesses like about 28 other QBs in this league.

I have to say, I started this season on the fence about the guy. I liked him, but I didn't respect him. After this season, I can say that I respect him and that we can win with him... just not because of him. Admitting that he isn't particularly good at something isn't ragging on him. In fact, in this thread, I've pointed out far more good things that he does than bad. There's no need to argue that he doesn't do the bad when it's obvious. It obscures otherwise legitimate arguments for or against the guy.

akhhorus

01-01-2010, 08:08 PM

I understand that, but Campbell isn't a frigging statue. If he sees a blitzer he should call him out. Are you going to tell me that Campbell will be actively admonished if he calls out the blitzers to Rabach and the rest of the offense?

I agree that-assuming he did nothing for that blitzer-he should have done more, but as an analogy: if you were an opposing QB that saw that Blache put no one deep at safety and everyone looking like they would blitz, would you believe Blache was bringing the jailbreak? Against a team that brings a lot of exotic blitzes, they should be looking for the slot blitz. Against a team that doesn't, them changing up what they do can cause problems like that.

If I point out that something that Campbell does or doesn't do that doesn't mean that he doesn't do more good things than bad. The guy has weaknesses like about 28 other QBs in this league.

I didn't say you say that either way.

I have to say, I started this season on the fence about the guy. I liked him, but I didn't respect him. After this season, I can say that I respect him and that we can win with him... just not because of him. Admitting that he isn't particularly good at something isn't ragging on him. In fact, in this thread, I've pointed out far more good things that he does than bad. There's no need to argue that he doesn't do the bad when it's obvious. It obscures otherwise legitimate arguments for or against the guy.

I didn't say you were ragging on him. And I believe I've been saying basically the same things you're saying now for a year: he's a system QB that can make good talent around him look good since, well before this season, he didn't make many mistakes--but he's not good enough to overcome a bad situation or make Filet Mignon out of hobo meat lol.

44 goes 50 gut

01-01-2010, 08:17 PM

His stats aren't of a mediocre QB no matter how much you want to selectively pluck out certain ones.

You're right they aren't mediocre, his TD rate is terrible, his yards per completion is worse than many 2nd and 3rd string QB's :) While both his completion percentage and his Interception rate seem better than mediocre, they also seem to be an anomaly caused by the fact that he conservatively dumps the ball off to his outlet far too often, when he's not holding onto it too long and taking the sack instead of throwing the ball away for an incompleted pass.

Yes, but he's not the player you've decided he is lol

I don't know I'd say his assessment is pretty much spot on especially the part about Campbell's TD passes seeming to be overwhelmingly red zone dump offs to TE's and outlets. With VERY fe thrown to wide recievers. This is something we can all admit we've seen a whole lot of, and hey there it is supported overwhelmingly in his statistics. With very few TD's throw from "bomb" territory, where very good QB's seem to throw lots of TD's...

You don't like the 50-20 yard line TD stat... Which is odd, I find it extremely compelling, I think the only way you could find that stat not to be revealing is if you didn't want to admit what it is that it reveals.. Because it also reveals something about his artificially low INT. Rate and his artificially high completion percentage. Here comes the "yawns, LOL's and LMAO's"

akhhorus

01-01-2010, 08:36 PM

You're right they aren't mediocre, his TD rate is terrible, his yards per completion is worse than many 2nd and 3rd string QB's :) While both his completion percentage and his Interception rate seem better than mediocre, they also seem to be an anomaly caused by the fact that he conservatively dumps the ball off to his outlet far too often, when he's not holding onto it too long and taking the sack instead of throwing the ball away for an incompleted pass.

But his yards per attempt would tend to undermine this conclusion. A high completion percentage+a high YPA tend to show a Qb who seems to be very efficient with the ball and produces.

As for his yards per completion, its 11.2(middle of the pack in the NFL). Thats better than Kurt Warner, Carson Palmer, Kyle Orton or Jay Cutler and is tied with Matt Ryan.

I don't know I'd say his assessment is pretty much spot on especially the part about Campbell's TD passes seeming to be overwhelmingly red zone dump offs to TE's and outlets. With VERY fe thrown to wide recievers. This is something we can all admit we've seen a whole lot of, and hey there it is supported overwhelmingly in his statistics. With very few TD's throw from "bomb" territory, where very good QB's seem to throw lots of TD's...

Outside of the superstar QBs like Brees, Rivers, Brady and Peyton, most Qbs haven't thrown many TDs that long this year. Schaub leads the NFl in passing yards, but only has 5 tds of that length. Eli only has 5 also, same for Favre & Warner, Carson Palmer has 3 and Orton has 1(despite having Marshall/Royal).

Also, going through the QB situ stats, its pretty clear that most Qbs get 50% or more of their TD passes in the red zone also.

You don't like the 50-20 yard line TD stat... Which is odd, I find it extremely compelling, I think the only way you could find that stat not to be revealing is if you didn't want to admit what it is that it reveals.. Because it also reveals something about his artificially low INT. Rate and his artificially high completion percentage. Here comes the "yawns, LOL's and LMAO's"

As I said in response to Guy, when you have an Oline that can't block for for 5/7 step drops, you don't have much opportunity to throw the ball down the field and you're focusing on 3 step drops. There's not too many deep ball routes with 3 step drops in the NFL lol.

BurgundyNGold

01-01-2010, 09:10 PM

I agree that-assuming he did nothing for that blitzer-he should have done more, but as an analogy: if you were an opposing QB that saw that Blache put no one deep at safety and everyone looking like they would blitz, would you believe Blache was bringing the jailbreak? Against a team that brings a lot of exotic blitzes, they should be looking for the slot blitz. Against a team that doesn't, them changing up what they do can cause problems like that.
I guess that's where I'm not going to be so forgiving. After 4 years of high school, 5 years of college (redshirt) and 5 years of NFL (redshirt), I expect that -- regardless of whether a specific opposing team in a specific game employs one type of blitz very often or not -- my effing QB would be able to recognize it. I consider the fact that he didn't, hasn't and, by all indications, cannot at this juncture, a weakness in his game.

I didn't say you were ragging on him. And I believe I've been saying basically the same things you're saying now for a year: he's a system QB that can make good talent around him look good since, well before this season, he didn't make many mistakes--but he's not good enough to overcome a bad situation or make Filet Mignon out of hobo meat lol.
We agree on this, expect you let Campbell off the hook a bit more than I do. We have talked about that, of course (the routine short range inaccuracy, holding the ball too long, playing too conservatively, etc.) and I think you're too forgiving in those areas.

As for the other discussion you've been having with GNT, I have to say that I generally agree with your position. The other poster has a position and is looking to justify that position through narrow interpretation and presentation of history. While Campbell is getting better with each game, what I cannot do, however, is give Campbell a pass on his remaining faults. Dude cannot read a blitz lol. That should be on his list of New Year's resolutions.

akhhorus

01-01-2010, 09:26 PM

I guess that's where I'm not going to be so forgiving. After 4 years of high school, 5 years of college (redshirt) and 5 years of NFL (redshirt), I expect that -- regardless of whether a specific opposing team in a specific game employs one type of blitz very often or not -- my effing QB would be able to recognize it. I consider the fact that he didn't, hasn't and, by all indications, cannot at this juncture, a weakness in his game.

I'd like to see him with good offensive coaching. We know he can look better when he has targets he can trust, I wonder where the line between Campbell's limitations/Bad coaching/prep work is.

We agree on this, expect you let Campbell off the hook a bit more than I do. We have talked about that, of course (the routine short range inaccuracy, holding the ball too long, playing too conservatively, etc.) and I think you're too forgiving in those areas.

I think Campbell's abilities with the medium routes, toughness and general talent overcome those limitations in the right system/situation.

As for the other discussion you've been having with GNT, I have to say that I generally agree with your position. The other poster has a position and is looking to justify that position through narrow interpretation and presentation of history. While Campbell is getting better with each game, what I cannot do, however, is give Campbell a pass on his remaining faults. Dude cannot read a blitz lol. That should be on his list of New Year's resolutions.

And I've never said that Campbell is anything more than a good system Qb, but you're right about your characterization of GNT's presentation. Campbell can't read a blitz, which is why he needs a quality Oline in front of him.

BurgundyNGold

01-01-2010, 09:38 PM

I'd like to see him with good offensive coaching. We know he can look better when he has targets he can trust, I wonder where the line between Campbell's limitations/Bad coaching/prep work is.
Trusting the targets is huge. If Campbell has shown anything it's that he's like most pure passers: The more of a rhythm he gets into, the better game he has. Moss and ARE dropping so many balls kills most drives. Campbell's short range problems just exacerbate that condition.

I think Campbell's abilities with the medium routes, toughness and general talent overcome those limitations in the right system/situation.
That's the operative phrase in all of this. We might be having the same discussions about Phillip Rivers in a WCO. In a system where something like 70% of the passes start off behind the LOS and 90% of the passes go less than 10 yards (Zorn's numbers this year), Campbell's short range inaccuracy coupled with WR drops just kills too damned many drives. Without the drops, you can survive (McNabb is a perfect example of an inaccurate short range passer who has been successful in a WCO). But the inaccuracy has to stop. I think that in Shanny's more verticalized WCO, we can expect to see Campbell finish a lot more drives because the passes will be more to his strengths.

And I've never said that Campbell is anything more than a good system Qb, but your'e right about your characterization of GNT's presentation. Campbell can't read a blitz, which is why he needs a quality Oline in front of him.
I think some of that blitz reading business is, as you say, coaching. I mean, you might not need 4 seconds if you can read how much time you have and can communicate where to go with the ball before the snap. The problem is that under both Gibbs and Zorn, Campbell hasn't had the freedom to check out of very many plays and he couldn't do it at all until quite recently. Put him into more of a fluid offense at the LOS (like Shanny has run for years) and maybe you see where the QB can help the OL instead of being completely reliant upon them.

tuckahoeskin

01-01-2010, 09:44 PM

Campbell can't read a blitz, which is why he needs a quality Oline in front of him.

Maybe it would be easier to read where the blitz was coming from if you only had to pick out one or two isolated blitzers as opposed to seven or eight defenders on a jailbreak every other play. :Peace:

akhhorus

01-01-2010, 09:46 PM

Trusting the targets is huge. If Campbell has shown anything it's that he's like most pure passers: The more of a rhythm he gets into, the better game he has. Moss and ARE dropping so many balls kills most drives. Campbell's short range problems just exacerbate that condition.

Bingo Pajama:
This year, Campbell's QB rating by in the number of attempts:
First 10 attempts: 75.7
Attempts 11-20: 86.7
21-30: 99.7

That's the operative phrase in all of this. We might be having the same discussions about Phillip Rivers in a WCO. In a system where something like 70% of the passes start off behind the LOS and 90% of the passes go less than 10 yards (Zorn's numbers this year), Campbell's short range inaccuracy coupled with WR drops just kills too damned many drives. Without the drops, you can survive (McNabb is a perfect example of an inaccurate short range passer who has been successful in a WCO). But the inaccuracy has to stop. I think that in Shanny's more verticalized WCO, we can expect to see Campbell finish a lot more drives because the passes will be more to his strengths.

Not here. I don't think Campbell will be the Skins' opening day QB in 2010 unless he finds pictures of Shanny in bed with Manuel Noriega.

I think some of that blitz reading business is, as you say, coaching. I mean, you might not need 4 seconds if you can read how much time you have and can communicate where to go with the ball before the snap. The problem is that under both Gibbs and Zorn, Campbell hasn't had the freedom to check out of very many plays and he couldn't do it at all until quite recently. Put him into more of a fluid offense at the LOS (like Shanny has run for years) and maybe you see where the QB can help the OL instead of being completely reliant upon them.

Agreed 1000%

44 goes 50 gut

01-01-2010, 10:53 PM

But his yards per attempt would tend to undermine this conclusion. A high completion percentage+a high YPA tend to show a Qb who seems to be very efficient with the ball and produces.

He is 26th in the NFL (career, among active QB's) with 6.6 Yards per attempt, with 12 active QB's that are worse. most of those are backups and a guy who can only be described as a 4th string QB who played in the UFL recently (our favorite topic JP Losman)

I don't know man, I think that would seem to support my conclusion.

As for his yards per completion, its 11.2(middle of the pack in the NFL). Thats better than Kurt Warner, Carson Palmer, Kyle Orton or Jay Cutler and is tied with Matt Ryan.

Campbell is tied for 32nd in career yards per completion among active QB's that makes him better than approximately 5 active QB's in the entire league. He is improved this year, but he's also worsened his INT rate this year (which I am not damning him for; I just don't think it's a coincidence that one improved while the other worsened)

I suspect being behind so much this season caused Campbell to have to throw more to his primary and secondary reads, and as a result his stats look a lot more "normal"... his TD rate has improved and his INT rate has gone from freakishly low to much more normal looking.

I think he is a better QB than those stats, I just don't think he's that much better.

Outside of the superstar QBs like Brees, Rivers, Brady and Peyton, most Qbs haven't thrown many TDs that long this year. Schaub leads the NFl in passing yards, but only has 5 tds of that length. Eli only has 5 also, same for Favre & Warner, Carson Palmer has 3 and Orton has 1(despite having Marshall/Royal).

All of those guys have that many in ONE season... unless I misread Guy's posts (and I may have I'm tired) he said Campbell has thrown 1 such TD in the past 3 seasons (or was it two?)

Also, going through the QB situ stats, its pretty clear that most Qbs get 50% or more of their TD passes in the red zone also.

If Campbell has thrown 1 TD between mid field and the opponents 20 in 3 seasons, my first question, is what is Campbell's percentage of TD passes thrown in the red zone? I mean if MOST Qb's throw somewhere around 50% of their TD's in the red: that means a significant percentage of their TD's must be from outside of the redzone... where Campbell has almost none (between 50 and 20 anyway, too tired and lazy to look up his TD stats from his own side of the field).

As I said in response to Guy, when you have an Oline that can't block for for 5/7 step drops, you don't have much opportunity to throw the ball down the field and you're focusing on 3 step drops. There's not too many deep ball routes with 3 step drops in the NFL lol.

Right now he's been sacked a total of 3 times more than last year.... I'll give you that his performance is negatively effected by the o-line... I like to think I'm a reasonable person. But I just don't see the throws when he does have time. I'll give you that he might be a middling game manager with a good line.... That's not good enough IMO... still even with all that I think the skins should bring him back and let the QB they draft sit and watch for a year or so.

Maybe he turns into a more far fetched less likely Drew Brees story. I doubt it, but it's football if "stranger things" didn't happen some times, then it would be boring.

akhhorus

01-02-2010, 12:06 AM

He is 26th in the NFL (career, among active QB's) with 6.6 Yards per attempt, with 12 active QB's that are worse. most of those are backups and a guy who can only be described as a 4th string QB who played in the UFL recently (our favorite topic JP Losman)

I don't know man, I think that would seem to support my conclusion.

Thats a bit selective in your stat use by using career YPA. I thought we were talking about 2009, where his YPA is 7.2. Also, Eli Manning has a career Ypa of 6.7, I don't think he's only slightly better than Campbell.

Campbell is tied for 32nd in career yards per completion among active QB's that makes him better than approximately 5 active QB's in the entire league.

More selective stat use: 12 of those 32 Qbs are backups, on IR or out of the league. And using that stat as a criteria, are you going to say with a straight face that Michael Vick, who's 3rd among active Qbs in yards per completion, is better than Peyton Manning(12th in ypc), Brady(20th) or Brees(24th)?

He is improved this year, but he's also worsened his INT rate this year (which I am not damning him for; I just don't think it's a coincidence that one improved while the other worsened)

Can you make up your mind whether you're talking about 2009 or Campbell's career? You can't keep dipping into one stat cohort and then another.

I suspect being behind so much this season caused Campbell to have to throw more to his primary and secondary reads, and as a result his stats look a lot more "normal"... his TD rate has improved and his INT rate has gone from freakishly low to much more normal looking.

Thats not really backed up by statistical analysis. Campbell, unless he throws 41 passes on sunday, will have less pass attempts than he did in 2008. And his INT rate then was 1.2%. His 3.2% this year looks like a major anomaly.

I think he is a better QB than those stats, I just don't think he's that much better.

I stand by my comments about him being a B/B+ level system Qb.

All of those guys have that many in ONE season... unless I misread Guy's posts (and I may have I'm tired) he said Campbell has thrown 1 such TD in the past 3 seasons (or was it two?)

That doesn't undermine my point. If you want to use that as your criteria for good Qbing, only superstar Qbs are any good.

If Campbell has thrown 1 TD between mid field and the opponents 20 in 3 seasons, my first question, is what is Campbell's percentage of TD passes thrown in the red zone? I mean if MOST Qb's throw somewhere around 50% of their TD's in the red: that means a significant percentage of their TD's must be from outside of the redzone... where Campbell has almost none (between 50 and 20 anyway, too tired and lazy to look up his TD stats from his own side of the field).

The top 10 Qbs in touchdown passes in 2009:
Brees: 21/34 touchdown passes in the red zone..61%
Peyton: 20/33 touchdown passes in the red zone..60%
Favre 23/29 touchdown passes in the red zone..80%
Aaron Rogers: 16/29..55%
Tom Brady 16/28 57%
Eli 13/28 48%
Rivers: 16/27 59%
Schaub 20/27 74%
Warner 21/26 80%
Romo 13/24 54%

Sure looks like Qbs get the vast majority of their TD in the red zone. The average of red zone TDs of the top 10 Qbs in terms of touchdown passes is 63% and the rest of that 37% is split between 20-50 yarders, and 50+ yard TDs.

Right now he's been sacked a total of 3 times more than last year

I don't have the QB hit numbers for 2008, but I suspect its far less than the 90 in 2009 so far.

.... I'll give you that his performance is negatively effected by the o-line... I like to think I'm a reasonable person. But I just don't see the throws when he does have time. I'll give you that he might be a middling game manager with a good line.... That's not good enough IMO... still even with all that I think the skins should bring him back and let the QB they draft sit and watch for a year or so.

Maybe he turns into a more far fetched less likely Drew Brees story. I doubt it, but it's football if "stranger things" didn't happen some times, then it would be boring.

Like I said: he's a system QB. Put him with WRs he trusts(he clearly doesn't trust Moss or ARE, and why should he?) and a line that can give him time, and he'll shred defenses. But for whatever reason he can't salvage a bad offensive personnel. For his sake, I hope he goes somewhere that has those things and always screws up if/when he faces the redskins.

shally

01-02-2010, 12:19 AM

Thats a bit selective in your stat use by using career YPA. I thought we were talking about 2009, where his YPA is 7.2. Also, Eli Manning has a career Ypa of 6.7, I don't think he's only slightly better than Campbell.

More selective stat use: 12 of those 32 Qbs are backups, on IR or out of the league. And using that stat as a criteria, are you going to say with a straight face that Michael Vick, who's 3rd among active Qbs in yards per completion, is better than Peyton Manning(12th in ypc), Brady(20th) or Brees(24th)?

Can you make up your mind whether you're talking about 2009 or Campbell's career? You can't keep dipping into one stat cohort and then another.

Thats not really backed up by statistical analysis. Campbell, unless he throws 41 passes on sunday, will have less pass attempts than he did in 2008. And his INT rate then was 1.2%. His 3.2% this year looks like a major anomaly.

I stand by my comments about him being a B/B+ level system Qb.

That doesn't undermine my point. If you want to use that as your criteria for good Qbing, only superstar Qbs are any good.

The top 10 Qbs in touchdown passes in 2009:
Brees: 21/34 touchdown passes in the red zone..61%
Peyton: 20/33 touchdown passes in the red zone..60%
Favre 23/29 touchdown passes in the red zone..80%
Aaron Rogers: 16/29..55%
Tom Brady 16/28 57%
Eli 13/28 48%
Rivers: 16/27 59%
Schaub 20/27 74%
Warner 21/26 80%
Romo 13/24 54%

Sure looks like Qbs get the vast majority of their TD in the red zone. The average of red zone TDs of the top 10 Qbs in terms of touchdown passes is 63% and the rest of that 37% is split between 20-50 yarders, and 50+ yard TDs.

I don't have the QB hit numbers for 2008, but I suspect its far less than the 90 in 2009 so far.

Like I said: he's a system QB. Put him with WRs he trusts(he clearly doesn't trust Moss or ARE, and why should he?) and a line that can give him time, and he'll shred defenses. But for whatever reason he can't salvage a bad offensive personnel. For his sake, I hope he goes somewhere that has those things and always screws up if/when he faces the redskins.

i dont think he is a system QB, because no one has a clue WHAT system he could do well in..

i think he is a mediocre QB who has a lot of toughness, quiet determination, is a team player who will try his best to implement whatever system he is asked to run..BUT.. he lacks some very important skills (reading defenses, anticipating receivers/defenders moves, pocket awareness {he walks himself into a LOT of unnecessary sacks} and lacks vision to "see" what the defense is doing.

the only way i see him succeeding is with overwhelming team talent on both offense and defense (like Mark Rypien, Brad Johnson, or Trent Dilfer).. and that is the way he is likely to be remembered when the final tally is written on him..he just isnt that good, and it isnt for lack of opportunity.. he has a lot of starts with little significant improvement..i understand you can certainly bring out stats that will tend to refute my last assertion.. but the plain truth is that his faults now, are the same faults he has always had-- and will likely always have.. can a team win with him ?? yup, for sure.. but you cant always depend upon overwhelming talent and he just isnt going to beat teams for you by himself.. above all, he is at his worst when you need him the most-- end of the game

Nomad

01-02-2010, 02:53 AM

i don't really believe this, but just for the f of it, we want Claussen, we trade Campbell and our #1 and Cooley to team with higher pick and take Claussen.

MadDog97

01-02-2010, 07:48 AM

i think he is a mediocre QB who has a lot of toughness, quiet determination, is a team player who will try his best to implement whatever system he is asked to run..BUT.. he lacks some very important skills (reading defenses, anticipating receivers/defenders moves, pocket awareness {he walks himself into a LOT of unnecessary sacks} and lacks vision to "see" what the defense is doing.

I think he can be a good QB, but it has to be in an old Gibb's offense. The offense pounds the ball and then he goes deep. I think he trusts Cooley, Davis, Devin Thomas, and Marko Mitchell. He could be successful with our D, but not in the west coast. For that reason he will should be let go.

What he lacks is what we see in Favre when Childress tried to pull him or what Manning felt by the team throwing the game. He lacks the fire and rudeness to tell the coach and receivers that what they are asking him to do is nuts. I think he does have some of the weaknesses you expressed, but they are magnified by several years of inept offensive line play. I still put the root of the offensive problems on the line play, and looking at the mock drafts do not make me feel any better.

:readme:

NamVet4

01-02-2010, 07:50 AM

Since he was drafted in the first round in 2005, Campbell has improved statistically every season. Before even taking the field in San Diego, Campbell enters Sunday's season finale having already tallied career highs in yards (3,337), touchdown passes (18) and quarterback rating (85.0). The 41 times he's been sacked this season also mark a career high.

Despite his growth, the team isn't committed to him beyond Sunday's game, and Coach Jim Zorn on Wednesday provided perhaps his most honest assessment yet of Campbell as an NFL quarterback.

"A lot of people want to just label every quarterback, 'He's got to be a franchise player.' I don't know if that is where he's at," Zorn said. "I don't think it is. But I think he continues to improve as a starting quarterback in this league."

Source! (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/30/AR2009123002532.html?wprss=rss_sports/redskins)

I included Zorn's comments as an epitaph for Jason Campbell. Read what you want into those comments.
If he stays, Perhaps Jason Campbell is the second of the two headed monster known as "caretaker" QBs. Kept here with a veteran who is brought in while the new GM/Coach Team searches for the next "franchise" QB.
just my 2 cents . . .

MadDog97

01-02-2010, 08:00 AM

i don't really believe this, but just for the f of it, we want Claussen, we trade Campbell and our #1 and Cooley to team with higher pick and take Claussen.

I am going to state one more time that any QB needs offensive line help first. As I look at mock drafts we are getting Claussen and then a DT or OT. I maintain that we should trade down and get offensive line help (2) and then maybe an OLB. I would take my chances with Colt, assuming JC is gone.

akhhorus

01-02-2010, 09:09 AM

i don't really believe this, but just for the f of it, we want Claussen, we trade Campbell and our #1 and Cooley to team with higher pick and take Claussen.

Considering that the skins will be picking in the top 6, why would they deal all that just to move up a few spots when they can pick another QB in their natural 1st?

Canuck

01-02-2010, 09:41 AM

Considering that the skins will be picking in the top 6, why would they deal all that just to move up a few spots when they can pick another QB in their natural 1st?

I agree with you that it is a stupid move, but I would not put it past Snyder to fall in love with a player and be willing to trade up to ensure we get him.

If BA is really running things, then no chance it happens.

shally

01-02-2010, 11:46 AM

I agree with you that it is a stupid move, but I would not put it past Snyder to fall in love with a player and be willing to trade up to ensure we get him.

If BA is really running things, then no chance it happens.

snyder wont be making that decision.. Shanahan/Allen will.. and i dont think they have shown that kind of behavior in the past.. Shanny didnt trade up to get Cutler and he got Plummer without spending a first round pick.. it wont happen now.. especially when you see guys like Rodgers, Flacco, Big Ben all having solid careers without being top 5-6 picks..

BIGREDSKINSFAN1963

01-02-2010, 11:51 AM

shally

01-02-2010, 12:01 PM

redskins have time before they need to draft a qb in my view. jc is better than anybody they can bring in as a draft pick next season.they would be stupid to not take an ol with their top pick.personally,i hope it's big mike from idaho.:Peace:

the single most import decision ANY head coach makes over his tenure is who is his starting QB is.. it can be a gunslinger, it can be a system guy, it can be a caretaker, but all else flows from there

based upon past performance, i could see Allen going with Campbell, but NOT
Shanahan.. look at the types of qb's he has had.. they all could make big plays for him.. that isnt Campbell, IMHO. Jason will be traded for draft pick(s) and we will have a new qb next year..

redcayman

01-02-2010, 12:40 PM

the single most import decision ANY head coach makes over his tenure is who is his starting QB is.. it can be a gunslinger, it can be a system guy, it can be a caretaker, but all else flows from there

based upon past performance, i could see Allen going with Campbell, but NOT
Shanahan.. look at the types of qb's he has had.. they all could make big plays for him.. that isnt Campbell, IMHO. Jason will be traded for draft pick(s) and we will have a new qb next year..

I tend to agree that we will have a new QB next year but the question that keeps popping up is who? I just don't see Bradford healing properly and being effective next year and the only FA on Campbells level is Orton who is RFA too (kind of a lateral move IMO) I think Shanahan might be stuck whether he likes it or not and might want to make peace with Campbell as his QB next year.

BurgundyNGold

01-02-2010, 03:03 PM

BIGREDSKINSFAN1963

01-02-2010, 03:16 PM

the single most import decision ANY head coach makes over his tenure is who is his starting QB is.. it can be a gunslinger, it can be a system guy, it can be a caretaker, but all else flows from there

based upon past performance, i could see Allen going with Campbell, but NOT
Shanahan.. look at the types of qb's he has had.. they all could make big plays for him.. that isnt Campbell, IMHO. Jason will be traded for draft pick(s) and we will have a new qb next year..

when you put it that way shally,i agree with you.i can't see some rookie coming in and being the skins starting qb though can you?are there any free agent qbs familiar with shanny's scheme who are going to be free agents in 2010?i can't think of any.if the skins take bradford it will be another crappy selection by the redskins F/A.where and when will the madness end?

GuyNTexas

01-02-2010, 03:28 PM

No, you were trying to use his 2006 performance as some supposed proof that he's incapable of running an offense, when I pointed out the falseness of your crap, you've now switched to another criteria.

You point out nothing other than your lack of football knowledge.

I pointed out that the results of the switch from Brunell to Campbell turned out to be of little consequence, simply to show the double standard being applied. But I never expected, nor was I under any illusion that an inexperienced second year player would come in and turn the team around. The Redskins put Campbell in after it was decided that the season was lost, and thus, time to get the "franchise" QB some stick time in preparation for the following 2007 season. I've never based any negative opinion of Campbell on what he did or didn't do in 2006.

So don't tell me what I THINK.

Too bad Campbell improved from 06 to 07 in QB rating, int rate, yards per game, yards per attempt, wins, wins percentage and completion percentage. I can't say I'm surprised that you're cherry picking the one stat he dropped in.

Yes and you're forgetting to mention a couple of other stats that skyrocketed in 2007. Interceptions and Fumbles.

Campbell, for 7 games in 2006 had 10 TDs, 6 ints, 1 fumble. a 10/7 TD to TO relationship ... not great, but not bad. The 10 TDs in 7 games is a respectable level of production, and if you extrapolate that to a 16 game performance, 22 TDs and 13 ints would be NFL starter level performance ... not Manning, Brady or Brees like, but very respectable for a first time starter.

The great improvement you cite in 2007 is TOTAL NONSENSE. In 12 1/2 games, he had 12 TDs (2 more TD than 2006 with an additional 5 1/2 games played), 11 ints, and 13 fumbles (8 lost). That's a 12/19 TD-turnover ratio, and would be poor for even a rookie first year player. And I'm using the number of fumbles lost ... even though that is just a matter of luck ... the 13 fumbles would just make that already horrible ratio that much worse. No, I don't feel like being fair, so lets use the number of fumbles, because it's still a dead, negative play when he fumbles even if he's lucky enough that the opponent didn't recover it, so that makes the Ratio of 12/24 ...

Or the WRs sucked and blew in 2007. Considering that Moss didn't have a 100 yard game until he caught a TD pass in week 11, and he had 5 games of that first 11 weeks with 118 total receiving yards(and Campbell's yards per game was over 200 in those games), it looks like thats more on the WRs.

I'd say Moss has a track record, and a proven player in this league, and since NO OTHER RECEIVER had a TD pass thrown to them for an entire half of a season, do you think it could be the guy THROWING THE BALL? Ooooohhhhh Nooooo, couldn't be the passer could it? It couldn't be the 11 ints and 13 fumbles in 12 1/2 games could it?

I didn't bring it up, you wanted to claim that Collins came in and magically improved the passing game. Pointing out the same amount of games leading up to Campbell's injury is showing equivalence. I can't say I'm surprised that you struggle to grasp this concept, when I pointed out Collins/Campbell's performance in the same game in 2009 you didn't understand why I brought it up.

Oh, your very wrong on that. I know why you did. You're very transparent. It's the same reason you go to such great lengths to ignore the Chicago game (SAME GAME) that Campbell had a total of 100 yards, zero points in the first half, and Collins put up 24 points and 224 yards in the other half OF THE SAME GAME.

You didn't actually watch this game or you're lying to push your narrative. Anyone who is being honest or actually watched that game would know that the defense gave up 3 tds in the final 9 minutes of game time. I'm sure you have convinced yourself that this is Campbell's fault somehow, but no one should actually believe you.

This is a very self serving description of what ACTUALLY happened ... I won't call you a liar as you have called me ... lets just say I believe you believe your own nonsense, which is another way of saying you're pretty (fill in the blank)

The Redskins were leading 22-20 with 8 minutes left in the game. The Redskin defense forced a turnover and gave the offense the ball on the Philly 24 yard line. The offense stalled, even with an extra set of downs on a defensive holding call, and had to settle for a 3 pointer, instead of icing the game and making it a two score lead with 4 minutes to play.

Philly scored on the next possession, making it 26-25 (failing the 2 point try).

The Redskins needed only to engineer one drive, and kick a FG to win ... what did Campbell do on the this critical possession? Come on ... you know what he did ... thats right, he F U M B L E D, and Philly recovered it on the Redskin 10. They did what Campbell couldn't do on the previous possession that the defense handed him on a silver platter ... they scored a TD, and ICED the game.

But the loss was all on the defense? Now you should be starting to understand why TDs are important in the NFL, and how damaging it is to have a QB that is so allergic to them.

I guess it was Jason Campbell's fault that Williams put Reed Doughty on TO and gave up 4 TDs, forcing the skins to get into a 4 minute offense in the late 3rd quarter?

No, but he had something to do HIS fumble on the Dallas 30 yard line, two failed red zone opportunities, and HIS horrific pick he threw when we were in position to win the game at the end.

You throw for 301 and get 13 points when Portis and Moss fumble away the ball three times.

I don't think Moss would be the one I'd be singling out for fumbling too much if I were you. He's had 10 (5 lost) in 5 seasons with the Redskins, while Jason has fumbled 33 times in 4 years. In fact, Campbell is the leading fumbler on the team ... add in 38 ints over that period and he's got more miscues than he does TDs ... 51 TDs, 71 TOs.

Campbell did his job, the defense and Gibbs screwed up royally on the final drive.

I've pointed out the nonsense of your opinions here.

No, you just made posts that show that you didn't watch the games in questions or are conveniently forgetting what actually happened in those games.

The pass to Portis was 1 yard long pass behind the line that Portis ran for over 50 yards on, it would be nice if you were consistent in your criticisms since you wanted to dump on Campbell for getting credit for the same thing, no?

The 21 points the Eagles ripped off in 9 minutes is on the defense.

The 4 td passes that the defense gave up are on the defense, forcing the offense to get desperate.

And the loss was on the defense giving up a late drive to Trent Edwards and Gibbs calling 2 timeouts.

Your pathetic attempt at sarcasm aside, the impact of losing a hall of fame level left tackle is shown in the stats. You probably don't want to admit that, but the stats are what the stats are.

Until you show that the limits of your football knowledge are selective memory and agenda pushing, don't think that you can try to lecture me.

Y A W N

Thats not true. I'm watching the Rose bowl right now and each Qb has 4-7 seconds to throw. Against Dallas last sunday night Campbell had less than 3 seconds about 15-20 times.

I don't think the Redskins has the Rose Bowl on their schedule any time soon, but that's probably the best venue for a QB like Campbell.

If you think NFL QBs have 4-7 seconds to release the football, you're stoned CRAZY .. and you demonstrate your utter lack of knowledge of the NFL for all the world to see. I REST MY CASE, and you may call your first witness.

Collins had 4 seconds to throw on the Yoder TD pass. The long gainer to portis was a flair/screen, not a deep ball, thats supposed to come out in 2 seconds or less. The Betts TD was a 3 step drop, if the Qb holds on for longer than 3 seconds, it means the play is broken by the defense. For someone who wants to lecture about knowing the basics about football, you should have known that...

Its not a basic concept, its you trying to push a narrative by using an obscure stat that Campbell looks bad in.

Thats not what I asked for.

This has nothing to dow with what I said.

Funny that you didn't respond at all about my last comment about drops. Very telling.

And both players are multiple pro bowlers who are considered top 15 WRs in the NFL. Campbell doesn't have a top 20 WR to throw to, only Rogers has a good young TE in Finley and several other effective WRs to throw to.

Not true. Campbell has led the skins to late scoring drives to win or tie the game only to see the defense give up a score in the ensuing drive.

I've pointed out the nonsense of this concept of yours.

And even when he is able to put his WRs in a position to make a play, they have a bad case of the drops. I don't expect you to make an honest response to this.

His accuracy is actually pretty good(top ten in the NFL). You can believe whatever you want to I guess.

That stat you want to keep waving still is still selective stat use from you. When a team has a poor Oline that can't block for 5 and 7 step drops, you can't throw the ball down the field. For someone who constantly wants to lecture about learning the basics of football, you should know that.

Not a good example since the "pig" in this case is dependent on the other pigs around him to do his job.

His stats aren't of a mediocre QB no matter how much you want to selectively pluck out certain ones.

Yes, but he's not the player you've decided he is lol

If you want to continue this, pm me. I'm not going to continue to junk up this thread with this back and forth between us.

I'll say this for you ... you are persistent, if not a glutton for punishment.

4-7 seconds indeed ......bwuhahahahahah :niceday:

shally

01-02-2010, 05:48 PM

I tend to agree that we will have a new QB next year but the question that keeps popping up is who? I just don't see Bradford healing properly and being effective next year and the only FA on Campbells level is Orton who is RFA too (kind of a lateral move IMO) I think Shanahan might be stuck whether he likes it or not and might want to make peace with Campbell as his QB next year.

nope.. that wont happen in a million years..Shanahan isnt the kind of guy who gets stuck with someone at QB he doesnt want.. refer to Jim Zorn if you want to see what happens when you do that.

by the way, it wasnt Shanahan who wanted Orton, but rather McDaniel. why would anyone think that Shanahan would want Orton as a RFA ?

Well said. This is my thinking, as well.

Shanahan might have a caretaker for next year, at most.. but he wont be stuck with anyone long term..

next year, i predict we will have someone like Pennington or Rosenfels or Batch, but we will draft a QB whom Shanahan thinks will be the long term answer.

if there is no one in the draft who looks to be a sure thing to Shanahan, then we will set the stage for drafting someone in the 2011 draft OR try and work a trade for a veteran who can be that person.. that is how Shanahan ended up with Plummer

Again, i dont see anyway that Shanahan settles for a long term deal with Campbell, and i doubt seriously that the Redskins will be offering Campbell more than a 1 year deal, and i dont see anyway that Campbell TAKES a 1 year deal if he has any interest from another team

GuyNTexas

01-03-2010, 01:23 PM

nope.. that wont happen in a million years..Shanahan isnt the kind of guy who gets stuck with someone at QB he doesnt want.. refer to Jim Zorn if you want to see what happens when you do that.

by the way, it wasnt Shanahan who wanted Orton, but rather McDaniel. why would anyone think that Shanahan would want Orton as a RFA ?

Shanahan might have a caretaker for next year, at most.. but he wont be stuck with anyone long term..

next year, i predict we will have someone like Pennington or Rosenfels or Batch, but we will draft a QB whom Shanahan thinks will be the long term answer.

if there is no one in the draft who looks to be a sure thing to Shanahan, then we will set the stage for drafting someone in the 2011 draft OR try and work a trade for a veteran who can be that person.. that is how Shanahan ended up with Plummer

Again, i dont see anyway that Shanahan settles for a long term deal with Campbell, and i doubt seriously that the Redskins will be offering Campbell more than a 1 year deal, and i dont see anyway that Campbell TAKES a 1 year deal if he has any interest from another team

That pretty much sums it up, and how I see it too. Just to add my 2c, Orton would be an upgrade to Campbell but a swap would never happen. Pennington, I think represents a slight upgrade to Orton, but still not the long term solution. I think signing him would be a wise maneuver, and I'd take the best QB available in the draft.

The o-line issues can really be dealt with with other picks and FA. Given an uncapped year, the Redskins can plug a lot of holes that they might not otherwise be able to accomplish in one year.

shally

01-03-2010, 01:27 PM

That pretty much sums it up, and how I see it too. Just to add my 2c, Orton would be an upgrade to Campbell but a swap would never happen. Pennington, I think represents a slight upgrade to Orton, but still not the long term solution. I think signing him would be a wise maneuver, and I'd take the best QB available in the draft.

The o-line issues can really be dealt with with other picks and FA. Given an uncapped year, the Redskins can plug a lot of holes that they might not otherwise be able to accomplish in one year.

Matt Moore looking good for Carolina today.. ADD Delhomme to the list of possible FA's for next year.. i think he would be fine for up to 1 year as the rest of the offense is upgraded, and a long term QB is drafted..

44 goes 50 gut

01-03-2010, 02:01 PM

Interesting wrinkles, Henne got injured and Fitzpatrick has thrown 3 TD's Not that a game against Indy's 2nd string means much.

I can't imagine anyone investing much in Pennington, the guy has seemingly collected more paychecks from his sofa than in games in his career.

Seems like a good situation for a current backup QB with some juice, to get a starting try out with a team next season... Redman would not bother me in a Skins uni, I wonder if Billy Volek could be had?

shally

01-03-2010, 02:04 PM

TrueOracle

01-03-2010, 07:28 PM

I know I'm going out on a limb here but chances are Snyder's not making JC the franchise.

The more I think about it, I don't believe there's anyway JC will stay here in DC - even if he is a RFA. A lot of us, including me, have mentioned tenders, RFA etc, alluding to JC staying for a year to get a new QB in the chute. But after the last off-season, why would JC even attempt to stay just to break in a 1st rounder QB? Even if he's RFA, he'll simply take it public, for the first time ever, and demand a trade - which he'll get simply b/c our fans can't take this anymore. Bottomline - I don't think he'll play for this org again if he's not the #1 guy (meaning Snyder doesn't draft another QB in the 1st round). And with midget-maniac at the helm, that's simply not possible.

So if we draft a QB, JC is out of here. Translation: Patrick Ramsey Part Deux. Now after all these years we'll have to wait all the more years for something pride-worthy .

44 goes 50 gut

01-03-2010, 07:55 PM

Why are skins fans so constipated over QB's? Scratch that I know why, After Heath Shuler, a cast of clowns including Ferrot, and then Ramsey I guess I understand why....

If I've learned anything from watching the NFL since the 70's it's that there's always a good QB out there somewhere, sometimes he's riding the pine on your team already (Green, Gannon) sometimes he's undrafted (Romo) and sometimes he's a rookie first round pick (Big Ben, Ryan, Eli etc.)

This attitude that it will take years to find a QB is nonesense, and is mostly because Skins fans have had a long stint of poor to mediocre QB's.

Bill Parcells picked Bartel (as near as I can figure) that alone makes me want to see what he can do...

28Zcomeback

01-03-2010, 09:28 PM

shally

01-03-2010, 09:38 PM

Look at Theismann. The first time he QB'd a team to the playoffs by himself (I count 1976 as a Bill Kilmer year) was in 1982. That was his 12th year in the pros. It took a while for Joe to a) get accustomed to the game; and b) get a decent Oline in front of him. Even then, he needed an outstanding running game to open up the passing. I think JC will continue to develop. When he reaches his potential, he will be a fine NFL QB.

I think we need two more offensive linemen, a premium running back and a great QB coach to support JC. Even then we need a strong QB in the wings for those days when JC cannot get untracked. Like a Garcia or Kitna.

In addition, we need help all over, starting at wide out and going all the way except for LS.

times are different now.. guys like Ryan, Flacco, Sanchez, Stafford are all starting in their first years..The Mannings, Rivers, Palmer, Brady, Big Ben,
McNabb all starting in their second.. teams dont have the patience for players to develop over 4-5 years.. if they do, it will be their second or third team that reaps the benefits

Waterwolves

01-05-2010, 08:16 AM

shally

01-05-2010, 09:03 AM

Quarterback A
3,618 yards
20 touchdowns
15 interceptions
7.14 yards per attempt
64.5 completion percentage
43 sacks
86.4 passer rating

Quarterback B
3,094 yards
21 touchdowns
13 interceptions
6.64 yards per attempt
60.5 completion percentage
26 sacks
83.6 passer rating

Quarterback B has better receivers, a better line, and some semblance of a running game whereas Quarterback A has poor receivers, no line, no running game. But B is a franchise QB and one of the best in the league whereas A sucks and is going to be run out of town?

I am admittedly a homer but please explain this to me.

Saw this post on another Forum and I thought it was pretty interesting.

let it go... someone posted Campbell's record when he is tied or behind going into the latter portions of games... if i recall it correctly, out of 16 chances, he was able to lead the team to victory in 2 attempts..

it does not matter what you or i feel.. the only 2 votes that count are Allen's and Shanahan's