Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;600784]

The receivers are pretty comprable (Cotchery > Moss, Kelly > Stuckey, ARE > Clowney, Cooley > Keller, and all those matchups are pretty close), but don't you look longingly at that running game and wish you could get a piece of it?
[/quote]

Not to mention they have Leon Washington and Thomas Jones. Also a rookie with promise in S Greene.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

For you guys that feel like Jason is the real deal should his contract be extended today ?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=MonkFan4Life;600805]For you guys that feel like Jason is the real deal should his contract be extended today ?[/quote]Yes.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Please explain GTripp.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=MonkFan4Life;600805]For you guys that feel like Jason is the real deal should his contract be extended today ?[/quote]No. Wait 'til the bye week, then make a better decision.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[url=http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/10/02/gameplan/1.html]Gregg Williams, Rex Ryan have mental battle in Saints-Jets - Peter King - SI.com[/url]

i agree with everything peter king says in here about the redskins

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;600769]Have you been watched them play? Sanchez is the real deal. Cutler is the real deal. Campbell got the vast majority of his yards in and both of his TDs when opposing defenses were holding on to a lead and playing prevent. Rodney Harrison called Campbell out for what he is - a backup QB who no one is afraid of. He's certainly the best QB on our roster now, but come 2010, he won't be a starter for this team or any other in the NFL.[/quote]

He will be a starter for another team. You can put money on that. If you go look at the free agent QBs for next year. He is by far the best out of all of them. Lets see..

NFL Free Agents: [url=http://www.footballsfuture.com/freeagents.html]2010 NFL Free Agents[/url]

* People may say Orton is better. He does look better [I]in the Denver system[/I]. So maybe Campbell does need a change of venue. It worked for Orton who was horrible with Chicago. So if he does leave who do we pick up?

College:

Top 3 prospects:

Sam Bradford: Prototype NFL QB skills. SHoudl ahve came out last year. NOw he has injured his throwing shoulder and it seems to be worse thatn what was intially expected.

Tebow: A great leader. Athletic. But I dont think his athleticsm is going transfer to the NFL. He is not going to be running around like he did in college. I like the kid but either he is going to be a great pick or a great bust.

*Suffered a concussion

McCoy: Has taken a step back since last year. He hs 5 ints already and had only 8 last season. Will his athleticsm transfer to NFL. I would give Tebow the nod before him as far as athleticsm.

I dont even want to go past this. Because whomever we pick up, if we pick up someone in the draft, woudl have to be a sure shot. If not we will run him out of town also.

Unless we are going to make a trade with another team. Which would probably cost us a draft pick. Which we need for OLs and LBs. We also need to look for CP's future replacement.

Maybe picking up someone's back-up. Vick?

the options don't seem that great. Why do you think Vinny and DS were trying to grab someone so badly this offseason?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;600817]NFL Free Agents: [URL="http://www.footballsfuture.com/freeagents.html"]2010 NFL Free Agents[/URL]
[/quote]

Looks like we can bring back Pat Ramsey. Yeah!

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;600817]He will be a starter for another team. You can put money on that. [/quote]

I'd be willing to put money on that! No way does he start for another team next year. He may still be our starter, but no one elses. You would lose your money sir. The people that are saying he's not starting material here on this site, just mirror what other GMs and apparently ex players are saying.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=MonkFan4Life;600808]Please explain GTripp.[/quote]He had it earned last year at about midseason, then there were some doubts raised in the second half of the year about if he was regressing, and now he's proved that he's not.

I would extend him today, if I was in charge.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Harrison has Charles Barkley disease. A mic in your hand and success as a player doesn't mean the ego that's propelling your lips can suddenly turn conjecture into fact.

We can look at Shannon Sharpe as another fine example of this phenomenon.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;600825]He had it earned last year at about midseason, then there were some doubts raised in the second half of the year about if he was regressing, and now he's proved that he's not.

I would extend him today, if I was in charge.[/quote]

Why would you extend a QB when you have no idea who will be coaching your team and what offensive system you'll be running next year?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;600825]there were some doubts raised in the second half of the year about if he was regressing, and now he's proved that he's not.[/quote]

Were it only so easy! "Proof" is so ... subjective. :vomit:

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;600825]He had it earned last year at about midseason, then there were some doubts raised in the second half of the year about if he was regressing, and now he's proved that he's not.

I would extend him today, if I was in charge.[/quote]

WOW...thank the good Lord you are not in charge. You'd give him an extension when he's 3 for his last 11, and because he played two of the worst teams in the NFL back tp back and lost to one of them? One of them that had lost 19 straight? What did Campbell do to win any game this year? NOTHING. We won despite of him during the Rams game...he was no where to be found in the Giants game, and he only came on at the end of the Lions game which people have already pointed out was against a weak prevent type defense.
Campbell will likely keep decent % numbers cause most of his passes are short, but he will always disappear when push comes to shove and we need him. His qb make up is weak and has no win at all costs attitude.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;600828]Why would you extend a QB when you have no idea who will be coaching your team and what offensive system you'll be running next year?[/quote]


Good point -- why keep ANY continuity when you can just blow it all up and start over.

Every godforsaken year.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dgack;600827]Harrison has Charles Barkley disease. A mic in your hand and success as a player doesn't mean the ego that's propelling your lips can suddenly turn conjecture into fact.

We can look at Shannon Sharpe as another fine example of this phenomenon.[/quote]

Barkley just randomly speaks, Harrison just has no filter, but usually he is right on.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;600780][B]I'll take a recent elite defensive player [B]with a superbowl rings opinion over most others any day of the week. [/B]

I don't see how you can actually watch Cutler and Campbell play and think theyre equal.[/B] Theyre most certainly not. And Josh McDaniels, a guy who coached the best QB in the league, a guy who knows more about QBs than anyone here wanted Kyle Orton over Jason Campbell. If that's not damning for Campbell, then I dont know what is.

[B]As to Sanchez, the Jets have far less talent on Offense than we do.[/B] That, combined with the fact that he's a rookie, makes his performance that more impressive. I'm impressed when i watch him and I respect Trent Diflers opinion on QBs and he's very high on Sanchez. In 5 years, or whenever Manning and Brady retire, Sanchez will be one of the top 3 QBs in the league. No, we were not in a position to draft him, but we should have tried harder to put ourselves in a position to be. Now we're gonna be stuck drafting one of the overrated QBs in the 2010 draft. On the bright side, atleast whoever we hire to replace Zorn will get to pick his own QB.[/quote]

1. Since Harrison was part of a Super Bowl team, everything he says is correct? Now that's just poor critical thinking.

2. You are correct, I do not see Cutler and Campbell as equals, despite the fact that their stats are similar in many ways. Campbell is superior because he is not Captain Turnover like Cutler is.

3. What is the point of bringing up Cutler and Sanchez? Neither one of them will qb the Skins any time soon, if ever. It would be just as rewarding to discuss how Y.A. Tittle would do with the 2009 Skins.

4. You vastly underestimate the Jets offense.

5. Your sig has bugged me for some time because of its inaccuracy. Many studies have shown that dolphins do in fact "know what they are doing." They are quite intelligent and can recognize different shapes, different colors, and different verbal cues. They definitely know where the shore is and where open sea is because their food habits require such. Read the ethological literature about dolphins and you will realize that your sig advertises ignorance.

So, in sum, you have underestimated Campbell, the Jets offense, and dolphins. You have overestimated Rodney Harrison's insight. Good luck with all of that.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=jsarno;600824]I'd be willing to put money on that! No way does he start for another team next year. He may still be our starter, but no one elses. You would lose your money sir. The people that are saying he's not starting material here on this site, just mirror what other GMs and apparently ex players are saying.[/quote]

What GMs would these be? Not saying that some GMs haven't said that. But it seems like yoru just throwing that out there with out a name to back it. So tell me which GMs said that. Let's see. Would the Raiders possibly want him? Probably not. They got J. Russell..lol. NC. Naw they got Delhomme or maybe Feeley will be their starting QB. Jaguars..Naw they got Garrad. Tampa Bay..Naw they got Leftwich and 2 rookies. There are many possibilities. I haven't heard one analyst on NFL network ESPN or any other network say JC is garbage besides Harrison. The Dirty playing HGH user. JC is not a world beater but he is not what some people here make him out to be. IF he doesn't work. Who are we going to get to replace him. Maybe that's the question people should ask. Jason did well last year when he had a running game. Most QBs need a running game to be successful. He was 6-2 with a running game. When that went down hill. Everything else did as well. Actually I can't wait until he leave because the fans here treat him like shit. Maybe we should bring Shane Mathews Jeff George, Tony Banks or Danny Weurrfel back. Maybe We can get Heath Shuler to give up politics or bring back Gus Frerotte? In comparison to them does JC look that bad?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;600828]Why would you extend a QB when you have no idea who will be coaching your team and what offensive system you'll be running next year?[/quote]Good point. I'd have to think he's scheme adaptable. Given the evidence, I feel that applies.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=jsarno;600830]WOW...thank the good Lord you are not in charge. You'd give him an extension when he's 3 for his last 11, and because he played two of the worst teams in the NFL back tp back and lost to one of them? One of them that had lost 19 straight? What did Campbell do to win any game this year? NOTHING. We won despite of him during the Rams game...he was no where to be found in the Giants game, and he only came on at the end of the Lions game which people have already pointed out was against a weak prevent type defense.
Campbell will likely keep decent % numbers cause most of his passes are short, but he will always disappear when push comes to shove and we need him. His qb make up is weak and has no win at all costs attitude.[/quote]Well, I also wouldn't have drafted Devin Thomas. Thank god for him, he's proved us doubters all wrong.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;600825]He had it earned last year at about midseason, then there were some doubts raised in the second half of the year about if he was regressing, and now he's proved that he's not.

I would extend him today, if I was in charge.[/quote]

So what you are saying is that he showed you that he was a leader ? That he had a command of this offense or even the team itself ? Does Jason Campbell put this team in a position to win games or does he do enough to not give the game away ? What is it that Jason Campbell does best ? His strong suit so to speak.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Lotus;600834]1. Since Harrison was part of a Super Bowl team, everything he says is correct? Now that's just poor critical thinking.[/quote]
No, but, he was an elite defensive player, and he's confirming a point that is blatantly obvious to anyone who's looking objectively.

[quote=]2. You are correct, I do not see Cutler and Campbell as equals, despite the fact that their stats are similar in many ways. Campbell is superior because he is not Captain Turnover like Cutler is.[/quote]
-Cutler throws WAY more TDs than Camble.
-Campbell SHOULD have atleast 4 INTs (if defenders had held on to easy interceptions) and, in honesty, 2 more TDs (if Sellers and Thomas could catch balls that hit them in the hands. Conversely, Campbell has missed wide-open guys for big plays a number of times (check photo-evidence of this on extremeskins).
-If you honestly think Campbell is clearly better than Cutler, then youre simply dellusional. There's no evidence of this whatsoever.

[quote=]3. What is the point of bringing up Cutler and Sanchez? Neither one of them will qb the Skins any time soon, if ever. It would be just as rewarding to discuss how Y.A. Tittle would do with the 2009 Skins.[/quote]
No, i could discuss about 20 other QBs in the NFL that I would rather have than Campbell. Cutler and Sanchez are the two we allegedly had interest in in the offseason, hence the comparison.

[quote=]4. You vastly underestimate the Jets offense.[/quote] Depends on how you look at it. Their offense is good, because they have a good playcaller and excellent QB. We have a below-average QB and horrible play-caller. That said, the actual talent we have on offense is noteably superior to the Jets.

[quote=]5. Your sig has bugged me for some time because of its inaccuracy. Many studies have shown that dolphins do in fact "know what they are doing." They are quite intelligent and can recognize different shapes, different colors, and different verbal cues. They definitely know where the shore is and where open sea is because their food habits require such. Read the ethological literature about dolphins and you will realize that your sig advertises ignorance.[/quote]
My sig is a quote from Dwight on the Office. I do not endorse any particular view on sea-faring mammals. I simply found the quote amusing.

[quote=]So, in sum, you have underestimated Campbell, the Jets offense, and dolphins. You have overestimated Rodney Harrison's insight. Good luck with all of that.[/quote]
Thank you for wishing me luck. You should probably wish some on yourself. At this time next year, Campbell will be a backup QB somewhere. I don't think his career path will take as bad of a turn as Patrick Ramsey's, but the only way he ever starts again in this league is if a guy Jamarcus Russell or Matt Schuab gets hurt.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=jsarno;600832]Barkley just randomly speaks, Harrison just has no filter, but usually he is right on.[/quote]

I see what you're getting at, but the parallel I was trying to draw is the ego-driven "I could still get out there and whip these guys" mentality. Both Harrison and Barkley have this.

The thing is, as a sports commentator, you're either a straight man, a sort of ambassador type who tries to find the silver lining in any bad team, or you're the "bad boy" type who makes "controversial" statements under the guise of "just calling it like I see it". I think both Charles and Rodney are in group 3.

Most of the time though, guys in that group don't say anything controversial at all, they take shots at safe targets. For instance, Barkley continually ripping on the Wizards, but you'll never hear him saying "Kobe is a ball hog" (even though that's not terribly controversial either). But is anyone outside of DC really going to care if he railroads Brendan Haywood or Gil?

Likewise, what QB's can Harrison attack verbally without catching serious flack? How about Favre? Certainly you would expect Harrison would have some choice comments about Brett's gunslinging mentality, maybe he's even thrown pickles to Rodney. But he says anything about Favre being done or over the hill, he'll catch hell from everyone.

I mean, hell, he's taking on TO now -- regardless of what a head case the guy is, nobody has ever disputed that Terrell Owens is a hell of an athlete and can be / has been one of the best WR's in the game (when he's not sabotaging himself). But TO is a super easy target, so Harrison goes after him. Shocker.

Commentators who happen to be former athletes can have plenty of ulterior motive for talking smack. I don't really think you can take Harrison's comments at face value in this instance. Not that this will stop anybody who is looking for evidence that Campbell sucks and should be replaced at all costs.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dgack;600861]I see what you're getting at, but the parallel I was trying to draw is the ego-driven "I could still get out there and whip these guys" mentality. Both Harrison and Barkley have this.

The thing is, as a sports commentator, you're either a straight man, a sort of ambassador type who tries to find the silver lining in any bad team, or you're the "bad boy" type who makes "controversial" statements under the guise of "just calling it like I see it". I think both Charles and Rodney are in group 3.

Most of the time though, guys in that group don't say anything controversial at all, they take shots at safe targets. For instance, Barkley continually ripping on the Wizards, but you'll never hear him saying "Kobe is a ball hog" (even though that's not terribly controversial either). But is anyone outside of DC really going to care if he railroads Brendan Haywood or Gil?

Likewise, what QB's can Harrison attack verbally without catching serious flack? How about Favre? Certainly you would expect Harrison would have some choice comments about Brett's gunslinging mentality, maybe he's even thrown pickles to Rodney. But he says anything about Favre being done or over the hill, he'll catch hell from everyone.

I mean, hell, he's taking on TO now -- regardless of what a head case the guy is, nobody has ever disputed that Terrell Owens is a hell of an athlete and can be / has been one of the best WR's in the game (when he's not sabotaging himself). But TO is a super easy target, so Harrison goes after him. Shocker.

Commentators who happen to be former athletes can have plenty of ulterior motive for talking smack. I don't really think you can take Harrison's comments at face value in this instance. Not that this will stop anybody who is looking for evidence that Campbell sucks and should be replaced at all costs.[/quote]

Great post!!

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;600860]
-If you honestly think Campbell is clearly better than Cutler, then youre simply dellusional. There's no evidence of this whatsoever.[/quote]

Well, except for statistics. But who needs them, when the Denver Broncos new head coach and Rodney Harrison say otherwise.

[quote]
No, i could discuss about 20 other QBs in the NFL that I would rather have than Campbell.
[/quote]

Now this I would like to see. Not because I think Soup is the best QB ever, but because I think he's probably in that "12th - 15th best in the league" tier which *should* be good enough for a power running team with a strong defense to make a serious playoff run.

So let's hear it -- who are the other 20 QB's you'd take right now over Campbell?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=MonkFan4Life;600854]So what you are saying is that he showed you that he was a leader ? That he had a command of this offense or even the team itself ? Does Jason Campbell put this team in a position to win games or does he do enough to not give the game away ? What is it that Jason Campbell does best ? His strong suit so to speak.[/quote]I think he's a leader. But I KNOW that we don't have enough information to debate that. So we can throw that point out as basically meaningless.

I think it's quite obvious that he commands the huddle. Again, what evidence to the contrary is there?

Yes. Jason both offers enough opportunities to win a game and protects the ball well enough to not lose games. There's room for improvement in the latter facet of his game.

Jason's best asset is his ability to turn plays where the offense is completely defeated into 20 yard first down runs. But he's also one of the better passers in the NFL. I think, though, if he's getting compared to Eli Manning and Tony Romo (two of the best this year and last year), there's more flaws in his passing game then those two have. But he can compete in the NFC's toughest division, an that's valuable.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;600849]Good point. I'd have to think he's scheme adaptable. Given the evidence, I feel that applies.[/quote]

I thought the fact that he's had to be in so many schemes was the reason campbell apologists say he's never become league-mvp? He's been mediocre in every scheme he's been in at the pro-level. Jason Campbell will turn 29 in the 2010-2011 season. Unless you're predicting he'll go on to have a Favre-like career, there's no sense in extending a mediocre QB. He'll be on the downside of his career by the time he ever reaches any comfort level in a new system. Unless we keep a similar offensive system next year, I won't understand any argument for keeping Campbell around.

We're better off letting our new coach pick his own veteran QB familiar with the system and then draft a young guy the coach can groom. Now, if in 2010, Campbell wants to stick around for a Collins-esque deal and compete for a starting job, then so be it, let the best man win. But extending him in 2009 without knowing exactly what system we'll be running or who will be coaching the team is just stupid. It would turn prospective head coaching candidates away, and is almost as dumb as naming offensive and defensive coordinators before hiring a head coach.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

How good is Denver's o-line? Put Orton behind our o-line. Does he have Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal? One of those wins was lucky because he got a touch down off a play that should have been a pick. Orton was horrible in Chicago. But he has been placed in a QB friendly system. We dont have that here. Orton is not better than JC. Stats or other wise.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;600865]I thought the fact that he's had to be in so many schemes was the reason campbell apologists say he's never become league-mvp? He's been mediocre in every scheme he's been in at the pro-level. Jason Campbell will turn 29 in the 2010-2011 season. Unless you're predicting he'll go on to have a Favre-like career, there's no sense in extending a mediocre QB. He'll be on the downside of his career by the time he ever reaches any comfort level in a new system. Unless we keep a similar offensive system next year, I won't understand any argument for keeping Campbell around.

We're better off letting our new coach pick his own veteran QB familiar with the system and then draft a young guy the coach can groom. Now, if in 2010, Campbell wants to stick around for a Collins-esque deal and compete for a starting job, then so be it, let the best man win. But extending him in 2009 without knowing exactly what system we'll be running or who will be coaching the team is just stupid. [B]It would turn prospective head coaching candidates away[/B], and is almost as dumb as naming offensive and defensive coordinators before hiring a head coach.[/quote]Well, I mean, look at a stat sheet. It's hard to argue with what Campbell has accomplished in spite of significant offensive turnover. In a lot of ways, the word mediocre demeans what he actually has accomplished. The last year he played mediocre was 2007, which was his first full year as a starter. That was a long time ago.

You can probably find some 2008 splits that suggest mediocrity (**OMG--last 8 games--OMG**), but I think that's missing the big picture.

Still, I bolded your best point (and nice zinger, btw). A good organization would not handcuff it's head coach search by locking in a quarterback prior to firing it's head coach. Then again, a good organization knows how to value its own players in the context of the market. I'm clearly more concerned with them getting the small things right at this point than I am with them trying to show that they can be a good organization all of a sudden.

But that's the point. If the question is, "would you extend Jason Campbell right now?", I think the correct answer is, yes. And it's not a good situation right now to be deciding to extend players, but between Rogers, McIntosh, and Campbell, Jason is the only one who has played well enough to deserve it. And, frankly, if all a Jason Campbell extension does is force the organization to retain Zorn...then so be it. If it makes Zorn the best man for the job, then I could care less if we would not have kept him under different conditions.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

You know, you are never as good or as bad as stats and records may indicate, BUT:

[url=http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2009/leaders.htm]2009 NFL Leaders and Leaderboards | Pro-Football-Reference.com[/url]

After 3 games, Jason is in the top ten in passes completed (4th), passes attempted (10th), passing yards (9th), passer rating (9th), passing yards per game (9th) and yards per pass attempt (9th).

I'm sorry, but if there were any other name besides "Campbell, J." in this position, guys would be slathering at the bit to try and sign this dude for next season.

Will some of those stats come down? Sure. But my guess is they're going to be pretty good at year end and snipers looking for the magic bullet to fix this team should be careful what they wish for.

Fans of this team have gotten the front office and players we deserve.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

And honestly, there's one guy who has jumped Campbell in my opinion based on evidence from the month of September and that's Joe Flacco.

But there's 3 or 4 players I think Campbell has jumped in the hierarchy of NFL QBs.

Matt Hasselbeck
Kurt Warner
Jay Cutler
Chad Pennington

Some of that's due to injury and age decline, but those factors matter as well.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dgack;600870]You know, you are never as good or as bad as stats and records may indicate, BUT:

[URL="http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2009/leaders.htm"]2009 NFL Leaders and Leaderboards | Pro-Football-Reference.com[/URL]

After 3 games, Jason is in the top ten in passes completed (4th), passes attempted (10th), passing yards (9th), passer rating (9th), passing yards per game (9th) and yards per pass attempt (9th).

I'm sorry, but if there were any other name besides "Campbell, J." in this position, guys would be slathering at the bit to try and sign this dude for next season.

Will some of those stats come down? Sure. But my guess is they're going to be pretty good at year end and snipers looking for the magic bullet to fix this team should be careful what they wish for.

Fans of this team have gotten the front office and players we deserve.[/quote]

I totally agree. All he has to do is improve in the redzone and that is the product of coaching also drop passes, bad play calls, fumbles, etc.

I think we will be worse off if we let him go. At the least we need to keep him for security purposes. Because I dont see anyone out there who is a sure shot. So be careful what you ask for. If we start winning I wonder what people will say then.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

the panthers would love to have Jason Campbell right now

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;600874]If we start winning I wonder what people will say then.[/quote]

* "Sure, but [opponent] sucks!"
* It's better playcalling, Campbell didn't do anything special
* It's the defense
* Portis found his step again
* The receivers are bailing out Campbell
* Luck
* He's still not a leader (whatever that means)
* etc

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

To be honest as much as I have been an advocate of Colt to get a shot, I believe that Jason is the best QB on our roster, and better than most QB's on most rosters. Suprisingly, of all of the rookies and verteran QB's that may become available for us to draft or pick up this offseason, I feel that Campbell would give us the best chance to win over the next several years. Especially if we stick with the WCO because of the amount of time it takes to learn and perfect the system.

Honestly, I want to keep the WCO. I want to keep Campbell and even Zorn. If we keep changing the offense every 2 years, then it is never going to get any better. For once I want to see them stick with something and see it through long enough to actually reap the rewards. If it can work in Philly with McNabb, then it can work in Washington with Campbell. I think that Campbell is on his way to being better than McNabb, the numbers are starting to show. The only thing that has to improve now is TD passess and Wins.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Angry;600880]To be honest as much as I have been an advocate of Colt to get a shot, I believe that Jason is the best QB on our roster, and better than most QB's on most rosters. Suprisingly, of all of the rookies and verteran QB's that may become available for us to draft or pick up this offseason, I feel that Campbell would give us the best chance to win over the next several years. Especially if we stick with the WCO because of the amount of time it takes to learn and perfect the system.

Honestly, I want to keep the WCO. I want to keep Campbell and even Zorn. If we keep changing the offense every 2 years, then it is never going to get any better. For once I want to see them stick with something and see it through long enough to actually reap the rewards. If it can work in Philly with McNabb, then it can work in Washington with Campbell. I think that Campbell is on his way to being better than McNabb, the numbers are starting to show. The only thing that has to improve now is TD passess and Wins.[/quote]I would actually be pretty surprised if, when McNabb returns from injury, if he's more effective than Campbell is. The Eagles have OL troubles as well, and while I'd take their receivers over ours in a vacuum, I've long thought Campbell to be the more accurate passer of the two.

I think Campbell will get our receivers more chances than McNabb will get their receivers. And then, we'll see what our offense is really made of over the next 4 games or so.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

One bloggers interesting take:

[url=http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=301745]The failure of Jason Campbell in pictures (Lions game) - EXTREMESKINS.com[/url]

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Just for shits and giggles, I just spent 15 minutes googling and found threads on Bucs, Bills, Raiders, Browns, Rams, and Panthers forums discussing the possibility of getting Campbell next year. Unsurprisingly, most of the people in the discussion think Soup is a solid if unspectacular QB who works his ass off, isn't a diva, and doesn't make a ton of mistakes.

Perhaps more importantly, they almost all believe he's a steal who is undervalued because of where he plays and the constant chaos here.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=SBXVII;600887]One bloggers interesting take:

[URL="http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=301745"]The failure of Jason Campbell in pictures (Lions game) - EXTREMESKINS.com[/URL][/quote]


I wish those caps were in HD so I could tell who all the receivers and defenders were, but at least that guy illustrated his points.

I don't know enough about progressions or playcalling to know if those examples are entirely on Jason or not, but I will say this:

-- Regardless of what we think of Zorn as a playcaller or head coach, his coaching expertise was supposed to be as a QB coach, right?

I mean, working with Zorn for almost two years, I would expect that Jason is doing what Zorn has drilled him to do.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=SBXVII;600887]One bloggers interesting take:

[url=http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=301745]The failure of Jason Campbell in pictures (Lions game) - EXTREMESKINS.com[/url][/quote]

And if you select 2-3 plays from any NFL QB's game you will see open receivers, missed reads and points left on the field. Not to call the poster a cherry picker, but he had an overall point he wanted to make and found some isolated video to support him. Also, without seeing the coaches tape it's impossible to accurately assess plays. From a TV camera angle you can't see what's happening in the pocket at the same time as seeing down the field accurately.