Tuesday Morning QB Poll (Week 9)

[skins74]

Originally Posted by Keino

Since the question is not necessarily about last week's result, but rather a general feeling, my general feeling is that this team would be better off with Campbell playing QB moving forward. I don't buy that playing a 2nd year guy who has had a full season and a half to carry a clipboard is throwing in the towel, and I further beleive that the longer we wait on playing the young man the more it will begin to retard his growth as a player. I don't want next year to be the learning curve year.

Having said all of that, I will remain at Dissaprove until Campbell is handed the keys to the Burgundy and Gold Sports car that Brunell drives like a Mini-van.

It's not that I think Brunell is bad, only limited and his limitations are exceeding his positives in my mind based on how this team has been perfroming. What I mean is that a game manager doesn't help this team because the defense doesn't do its job and stop people. Game managers at the QB position are only successful when they have a Defense that is good.

very well put

[skins111111]

its pretty hard to disapprove a QB rating of 109

[Green-Is-Good]

I am with the Italian dude on this one
Brady would not have been chosen over Bledsoe to start in SB unless he was their franchise QB

[shally]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

That doesn't count...he was already a franchise qb, only nobody knew it...

definitely a leap of faith.. on the other hand, we did not see what he was doing in practice

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Originally Posted by Green-Is-Good

I am with the Italian dude on this one
Brady would not have been chosen over Bledsoe to start in SB unless he was their franchise QB

Thank you my Zidane-loving friend..

[dj_stouty]

Again...I think we have entirely different definitions of "franchise QB".

Under your definition, anyone plugged into the system who catches on quickly and wins is automatically donned a "franchise QB". (Warner and Brady) If Garrard and Huard retain their starting jobs and take their teams to the playoffs are they automatically considered franchise QBs? Or are they a bad 3-game stretch away from getting the hook the following season?

I believe a franchise QB is one who, after several seasons proving his worth, is a bonafide winner and major commodity for their team. They don't compete for their jobs...its a given that they are the starter. 1st round draft picks are chosen "to become" their franchise guy. A lot of the time, that doens't work out.

So...should every team currently without a franchise QB or top 10 defense simply forfeit their games for the rest of the season because they don't fit the formula for a SB?

[Keino]

Once again, I feel compelled to reject the notion that playing Campbell now means forfeitting the remainder of the season. That's no more accurate than saying leaving an ineffective QB with an inflated QB rating in Brunell as the starter is forfeitting the remainder of the season. Neither are true.

As for Brady/Warner, I think it's safe to say that while they were unproven when they got their respective jobs, they proved themselves to be "Franchise QBs". It's quite possible that Campbell would offer the same type of proof. It's also possible he becomes Patrick Ramsey. I'd like to find that out this year not next.

[PennSkinsFan]

Disapprove. I am one of those rare ones as well that actually don't think throwing Campbell in is throwing the towel in, but believes we coudl be a better team with JC in the game.

[dj_stouty]

Originally Posted by Keino

Once again, I feel compelled to reject the notion that playing Campbell now means forfeitting the remainder of the season. That's no more accurate than saying leaving an ineffective QB with an inflated QB rating in Brunell as the starter is forfeitting the remainder of the season. Neither are true.

As for Brady/Warner, I think it's safe to say that while they were unproven when they got their respective jobs, they proved themselves to be "Franchise QBs". It's quite possible that Campbell would offer the same type of proof. It's also possible he becomes Patrick Ramsey. I'd like to find that out this year not next.

You guys will get your wish soon enough. Brunell's rope is short, I'm certain. With our defense dominating the bowels of just about every defensive category in the league, I'm sure a loss is imminent in the next 2 weeks. (regardless of how Brunell plays)

And when it happens, I'll give 100% support to #17.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Originally Posted by dj_stouty

Again...I think we have entirely different definitions of "franchise QB".

Under your definition, anyone plugged into the system who catches on quickly and wins is automatically donned a "franchise QB". (Warner and Brady) If Garrard and Huard retain their starting jobs and take their teams to the playoffs are they automatically considered franchise QBs? Or are they a bad 3-game stretch away from getting the hook the following season?

I believe a franchise QB is one who, after several seasons proving his worth, is a bonafide winner and major commodity for their team. They don't compete for their jobs...its a given that they are the starter. 1st round draft picks are chosen "to become" their franchise guy. A lot of the time, that doens't work out.

So...should every team currently without a franchise QB or top 10 defense simply forfeit their games for the rest of the season because they don't fit the formula for a SB?

I'm sorry but that just makes no sense at all.
Warner was a 2 time MVP and a Super Bowl MVP. He threw 41 TD passes one year and 4800 yards another. All Brady has done is win 3 SBs in a 4 year span. I don't care if you use the word "franchise", "superstar", "legendary", or whatever you want, but the reality is that in his 3 years prior to injury, Warner was awesome, and that Brady has been incredible his whole career. That is undisputable, and comparing Brunell to either of them is ridiculous. If Garrard wins 2 MVPs and a SB and Huard wins 3 SBs then hell yeah they are franchise QBs.
You are completely ignoring my point, which is very simple..to win the SB in this league you need an outstanding QB or an exceptional defense. And Brunell is nowhere near outstanding, and our defense is 3rd worst in the league. So what are we going to do? Keep hoping in a miracle, or finding out if the player we drafted to become an outstanding QB is capable of doing that?
I don't understand why you keep saying that it is a given that we would be forfeiting games by playing Campbell. If we were winning I would agree that we should stick with him..but we simply are not. the whole premise to having a QB like Brunell is that we could win with the running game and with our defense, and all he had to do was not make mistakes. That premise has completely fallen apart, since our defense is terrible and our running game is highly inconsistent at best. And so, it is not a coincidence that we do NOT have a winning record, and that out of the 3 games we have won, we were very very VERY close to losing 2 of them. Much closer than we were to winning any of the ones we lost.
And to answer your question (which is obviously skewed to favor your reasoning and ignores the fact that we have a first round pick QB sitting on the bench and a QB who could retire at the end of the year playing): YES. Every team that has a dreadful defense, a QB chosen in the first round sitting on the bench, a starting QB who is NOT gonna be around the year after, and that has a losing record, should make a QB change (which in your view equals to forfeiting games for some reason).

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Originally Posted by Keino

Once again, I feel compelled to reject the notion that playing Campbell now means forfeitting the remainder of the season. That's no more accurate than saying leaving an ineffective QB with an inflated QB rating in Brunell as the starter is forfeitting the remainder of the season. Neither are true.

As for Brady/Warner, I think it's safe to say that while they were unproven when they got their respective jobs, they proved themselves to be "Franchise QBs". It's quite possible that Campbell would offer the same type of proof. It's also possible he becomes Patrick Ramsey. I'd like to find that out this year not next.

Thank you. (If I had read this before I posted my reply I could have saved myself the time..lol...)

[dj_stouty]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

I'm sorry but that just makes no sense at all.
Warner was a 2 time MVP and a Super Bowl MVP. He threw 41 TD passes one year and 4800 yards another. All Brady has done is win 3 SBs in a 4 year span. I don't care if you use the word "franchise", "superstar", "legendary", or whatever you want, but the reality is that in his 3 years prior to injury, Warner was awesome, and that Brady has been incredible his whole career. That is undisputable, and comparing Brunell to either of them is ridiculous. If Garrard wins 2 MVPs and a SB and Huard wins 3 SBs then hell yeah they are franchise QBs.
You are completely ignoring my point, which is very simple..to win the SB in this league you need an outstanding QB or an exceptional defense. And Brunell is nowhere near outstanding, and our defense is 3rd worst in the league. So what are we going to do? Keep hoping in a miracle, or finding out if the player we drafted to become an outstanding QB is capable of doing that?
I don't understand why you keep saying that it is a given that we would be forfeiting games by playing Campbell. If we were winning I would agree that we should stick with him..but we simply are not. the whole premise to having a QB like Brunell is that we could win with the running game and with our defense, and all he had to do was not make mistakes. That premise has completely fallen apart, since our defense is terrible and our running game is highly inconsistent at best. And so, it is not a coincidence that we do NOT have a winning record, and that out of the 3 games we have won, we were very very VERY close to losing 2 of them. Much closer than we were to winning any of the ones we lost.
And to answer your question (which is obviously skewed to favor your reasoning and ignores the fact that we have a first round pick QB sitting on the bench and a QB who could retire at the end of the year playing): YES. Every team that has a dreadful defense, a QB chosen in the first round sitting on the bench, a starting QB who is NOT gonna be around the year after, and that has a losing record, should make a QB change (which in your view equals to forfeiting games for some reason).

We are 3-5...the playoffs are not out of reach yet...and this team has practiced and gameplanned with Brunell under center for the last 9 months. Until the chances of the Redskins making the playoffs are over, then the Redskins should do everything possible to WIN. You know Gibbs wouldn't have it any other way. Forgive me if I believe we have a better shot at winning with a veteran QB who rarely turns over the ball than a QB who until 2 weeks ago wasn't taking ANY snaps with the offense. I'd like to have the confidence that #17 could come in here and win as early as this week, but I have NOTHING to base that on...since we don't know anything about him except watching a few quarters of football against 3rd string defenses in the presason and the fact that he was a 1st rounder. (Which doesn't mean squat these days)

[Keino]

The problem is you equate the unknown with automatic failure. Also, JC got time against 2nd stringers and some starters in pre-season. Furthermore, who do you think was getting 1st string snaps when Brunell was out with a broken finger? Over the course of the 9 months, it's fair to say especially prior to pre-season (OTA and Mini Camps) that Campbell got as much, if not more work with the 1st team than any other QB on the Roster. Not to mention the fact that of our 3 QB's, Campbell is the only one who was at Redskins Park every day working on his mastery of the playbook and the QB position.

You want to stay with the known commodity because you think that we are still in playoff contention and he offers the best chance to win. Thats fine. Last year, I would've agreed with that position. Whats different this year is that the unknown commodity is now a year more experienced, and the known commodity is markedly worse than he was last year. If we get the QB play we got out of the first half of the season then, we are in fact truly out of contention. I think the unknown commodity offers us as good a chance, if not a better one than the known commodity based upon what he has shown us in terms of his skill set. He is bigger, stronger and faster than the current QB, and he needs an opportunity to become a known commodity.

You say we will get our wish. Only if Brunell falters yet again (Which is never something I wish for, but it appears to be inevitable), and that would be a shame if Campbell gets his opportunity in that scenario and proves to everyone he should've been the starter all along. It would be encouraging in terms of next year, but it would be disappointing in terms of this year, knowing that we could've potentially gone to the young man while the season was still salvagable. In fact, I can't get my wish, because if it were truly up to me, the switch would've been made after the Tennessee debacle....with an extra week to prepare for the next opponent, but that's me.

[shally]

Originally Posted by dj_stouty

You guys will get your wish soon enough. Brunell's rope is short, I'm certain. With our defense dominating the bowels of just about every defensive category in the league, I'm sure a loss is imminent in the next 2 weeks. (regardless of how Brunell plays)

And when it happens, I'll give 100% support to #17.

honestly, i do not think that brunell is on that short a rope.. the main reason is that the nfc east simply does not have a dominant team and despite being 3-5, we are not out of things by any stretch.

beat philly and we are right back inthe thick of it.. even losing to philly does not end things as far as playoffs are concerned.

so i think we are going to see brunell for longer rather than shorter this season. it is not the way i would have wished things to play out. but, i just want us to win and get into the playoffs. from there on, we could be a very dangerous team as we were last year

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Originally Posted by Keino

The problem is you equate the unknown with automatic failure. Also, JC got time against 2nd stringers and some starters in pre-season. Furthermore, who do you think was getting 1st string snaps when Brunell was out with a broken finger? Over the course of the 9 months, it's fair to say especially prior to pre-season (OTA and Mini Camps) that Campbell got as much, if not more work with the 1st team than any other QB on the Roster. Not to mention the fact that of our 3 QB's, Campbell is the only one who was at Redskins Park every day working on his mastery of the playbook and the QB position.

You want to stay with the known commodity because you think that we are still in playoff contention and he offers the best chance to win. Thats fine. Last year, I would've agreed with that position. Whats different this year is that the unknown commodity is now a year more experienced, and the known commodity is markedly worse than he was last year. If we get the QB play we got out of the first half of the season then, we are in fact truly out of contention. I think the unknown commodity offers us as good a chance, if not a better one than the known commodity based upon what he has shown us in terms of his skill set. He is bigger, stronger and faster than the current QB, and he needs an opportunity to become a known commodity.

You say we will get our wish. Only if Brunell falters yet again (Which is never something I wish for, but it appears to be inevitable), and that would be a shame if Campbell gets his opportunity in that scenario and proves to everyone he should've been the starter all along. It would be encouraging in terms of next year, but it would be disappointing in terms of this year, knowing that we could've potentially gone to the young man while the season was still salvagable. In fact, I can't get my wish, because if it were truly up to me, the switch would've been made after the Tennessee debacle....with an extra week to prepare for the next opponent, but that's me.

And me as well.