Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;598812]I'm just being real bro, pick a team then. You don't see me putting a saints avatar on mine and I used to live there[/quote]

First off.. Bro. You might not wanna assume everyone here is male, considering I'm not.

Nothing's wrong for having love for a team where you used to live. That doesn't make you any less of a fan of the current team you like.

Speaking of non-males... You know who I miss. Hess. lol you old timers know who I'm talking about.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

I think that Jason Reid points out that Campbell almost has to play perfect to keep us in games. I agree. Our running game has been noticeably absent and our defense has struggled to keep teams off the field.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Silly debate right now. He's not Brady, but it seems clear that he's not the root of our problems right now. He can certainly be better, but I would say the trend is positive on JC--he's gotten better, even if he's not lighting up the scoreboard.

THings that are more serious, IMO:

1. Where the fuck is our running game????
2. Why can't our D get off the field--that supposed to be our strength. ToP was brutal yesterday
3. D can't generate TOs
4. Play calling.
5. Brutal game-losing penalities
6. Consistent execution on EVERY play, JC included.

He's our best QB at present. Fix these other issues, and we'll win some games.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

The best QBs make big plays.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=tryfuhl;598823]The best QBs make big plays.[/quote]

In defense of JC, I gotta admit the best QBs tend to have big playmakers on their team.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=DynamiteRave;598825]In defense of JC, I gotta admit the best QBs tend to have big playmakers on their team.[/quote]
Brees has Shockey (not really a big play guy) and Colston and that's about it. I like Campbell to an extent but he doesn't feel comfortable putting the ball up to the receiver to catch. Maybe that's his style, maybe that's Zorn in his ear, or maybe he's used to WR's getting 10 yards open in college and being able to hit them late in the play.. I really don't know.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=tryfuhl;598829]Brees has Shockey (not really a big play guy) and Colston and that's about it. I like Campbell to an extent but he doesn't feel comfortable putting the ball up to the receiver to catch. Maybe that's his style, maybe that's Zorn in his ear, or maybe he's used to WR's getting 10 yards open in college and being able to hit them late in the play.. I really don't know.[/quote]

I get you. I'm on the fence with JC as well. I think Shockey used to be a big play guy though. I haven't seen him in action much anymore since going to the Saints. But Shockey was always a dude who could make something out of nothing. At least when he was with the Giants. But yeah, I'm a big fence sitter with JC, I wanna think the guy has it in him to pull out the big guns but I'm not so sure.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=DynamiteRave;598831]I get you. I'm on the fence with JC as well. I think Shockey used to be a big play guy though. I haven't seen him in action much anymore since going to the Saints. But Shockey was always a dude who could make something out of nothing. At least when he was with the Giants. But yeah, I'm a big fence sitter with JC, I wanna think the guy has it in him to pull out the big guns but I'm not so sure.[/quote]
I think that if he had more of a dropback system and a little less scheme he'd be better off, I hear ya "bro" ;)

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

We have playmakers my friend. We probably have the best Tight End in the league, we have an explosive Wide Receiver who can still run, we have a decent slot receiver who can't return a punt for a yard but can still catch the ball and we have, decent running backs.

What more do you need, the guy just doesn't have what it takes to be a winner. How many years of mediocrity can we take from the QB position, I bet Collins can get in there and at least provide a more consistent performance.

Did you hear Cooley today. They have not consistency on Offense! That on the QB!

He's not bad, but this game is a game of momentum and mental toughness and if you can't give your team the confidence to make some tough throws and stretch the field, then nobody is going to believe in you.

This teams problems are from the shoulder pads up!

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;598767]What are the stats on 4th quarter comebacks for most QBs. Ifyou said 4th quarter it might have been acceptable. But the comebacks kind of made yoru arguement less relevant. Only because only the great ones do that. Like Favre Manning and Brady. Only a hand full are probably successful. Even these Qbs had to take some lumps to get where they are. [B]There is no learning curve in Skins Nation and most people are unrealistic or impatient in their expectations.[/B] Brady was in the same system fo ryeas before he started. Manning was horrible his first year and okay the second year as a starter. it took years for him to win a Superbowl. His system remained intact also. Favre. If Favre was here as a young player he would never have reached his potential. He would have been ran out of town.

[B]So all I ask is be realistic and be patient. [/B]Mannings and Brady's dont come around that often. Both Flacco and Ryan are a product of a system that is QB friendly as far as their defenses and running games go. You can also say this for the coveted Sanchez. He is not putting up big numbers. he is maintaining the game and has a very good offense.[/quote]

Barf.

Impatient? In this day and age, patience is for excuse-makers.

Look at our "core" guys -- Samuels, Portis, Moss, Cooley, Randle El, Rabach, Randy Thomas, Campbell, Betts, Sellers, Daniels, McIntosh, Rogers, Griffin, Carter -- these are all guys who have been here going back to the dreadful 2006 season. Some even before that. Year after year it's nothing but ordinary with these players. Ordinary play, ordinary results -- but in many cases, extraordinary salaries.

Four seasons is about as long as anyone should need to know what you have and what you don't have. With this ownership structure, we're at the ten year mark. Ten years with three winning seasons. Just how patient are Redskins fans supposed to be?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

They gave up on one another on that 4th and 1. you can just hear Redskins Nation cry, HEAR WE GO AGAIN, we all felt it, the players felt it.

They just lost their emotion when we couldn't score AGAIN, we can't get on measly yard!

Then to top it off!

99 YARDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I was pinching myself, I thought I was having a NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET!

too bad I was AWAKE and in Disbelief!

Put in Collins, we need to know it it's JC or the Zornster!

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Mattyk72;598807]Build a strong team from the inside out and you won't have to worry about finding the next superstar QB who has to win you games on his arm alone.[/quote]

Do you think we've done that?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=BaltimoreSkins;598815]I think that Jason Reid points out that Campbell almost has to play perfect to keep us in games. I agree. [B]Our running game has been noticeably absent and our defense has struggled to keep teams off the field.[/B][/quote]

Yet here we are still banging away at this dead issue.

I don't get it.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Beemnseven;598838]Four seasons is about as long as anyone should need to know what you have and what you don't have. With this ownership structure, we're at the ten year mark. Ten years with three winning seasons. Just how patient are Redskins fans supposed to be?[/quote]So what's the solution? Get rid of all of them just to prove a point? Or try to separate the non-contributors from the ones who can help us win in the future?

I agree that keeping all hands on deck while trying to add different forms of talent is not leading to the place we want it to. But what should we change first?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Mattyk72;598807]Build a strong team from the inside out and you won't have to worry about finding the next superstar QB who has to win you games on his arm alone.[/quote]

Nice Matty...I agree with you here man.

It's good to hear people talk about building a foundation upon fundementals like these.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

We have no running game. Our D is not getting off the field. Our playcalling has been questionable, to put it nicely.

Solution: bench the QB.

:yeahright

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

I laugh at the people saying the stats lie because he doesn't have enough TD's and his attempts are high. Clearly you all aren't cognizant of the fact that the passer rating actually takes all those things into account, which is why it's used as a metric to compare QB's in the first place.

:P

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Green1;598742]Every thread someone is calling for campbell to be benched but his numbers are great.
1. Rating: 92.5 Higher than Brady, Big Ben, C. Palmer, Cutler, and Rivers
2. 9th in passing yards: More that Rodgers, Ryan, Palmer, E. Manning, & Cutler
3. 5th in the Comp. Percent. 67.6%: Higher than everyone in the league except P. Manning, Brees, Big Ben, and Chad Penn.

So what else does he have to do to be considered a good QB. The Skins have a good QB, just bad playcalling, no running game, and no O-line. Get off campbell's back. He is doing more with less better than anyone in the NFL. Check the stats the STATS don't lie![/quote]

No, numbers don't lie, but in this case, they are amazingly misleading. He has a total of 3 tds in 3 games (playing a couple of the worst teams in the NFL) and has 2 ints coupled with a league leading 5 fumbles. He should have done A LOT BETTER. He still is not throwing the ball well deep, and he for some reason leaves the building with his tail between his legs when the Skins make it to the redzone.
If you think his numbers don't lie, then I can certainly sell you on bringing Brunell back, cause supposedly, his numbers didn't lie either.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=jsarno;598870]If you think his numbers don't lie, then I can certainly sell you on bringing Brunell back, cause supposedly, his numbers didn't lie either.[/quote]Well, that's correct, but we don't need another rhetorical argument. That's not contributing to the discussion.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Gibbs made a legend winning SB's without superstar QB power. We can as well but the coaching staff will have to learn what he did. Improvise, and adapt the scheme and attack to "who" you have. We need O-line and running game.... Oh yah, and someone who can get open
We will have to beef up JC supporting cast and he will become a solid, productive QB. He may never be a.........Montana?
Mark Rypien was F...n AMAZING when he got sacked like 7 times in 91'. Things changed....rapidly as "that number" changed post Gibbs.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=jamf;598787]He also has the most passing attempts in anyone in the group and the least TDs.

Again, It's not all his fault but it's pretty much the same shit that got Brunell run out of town.[/quote]

Damn...good call. I just commented from reading the first post not reading the other 4 pages, didn't expect anyone else to bring Brunell up. Good job.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Mattyk72;598792]I do agree people need to get off his back already. Our problems right now run much deeper than who's playing QB. He's one of our lone bright spots so far.[/quote]

First sentence OK, second sentence dead on, third sentence is not accurate. He's NOT a bright spot. If he stepped up and won us a game, then yes, I'd say he was, but he disappeared when we needed him most. Don't know why Campbell's lease is sooooo long when others have had no leash at all.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;598768]Okay say stats do lie. In the list that he mentioned by the OP which one of those QBs do you think is not a good QB?[/quote]

They're all good. But their teams don't avergae 13 points a game either. Like I said. JC has to take some of the blame for that. But it's not all on him either.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=jsarno;598875]First sentence OK, second sentence dead on, third sentence is not accurate. He's NOT a bright spot. If he stepped up and won us a game, then yes, I'd say he was, but he disappeared when we needed him most. Don't know why Campbell's lease is sooooo long when others have had no leash at all.[/quote]Didn't Brandon Lloyd last two years on this team? Now there's a guy who actually never accomplished anything.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skinsfan69;598877]They're all good. But their teams don't avergae 13 points a game either. Like I said. JC has to take some of the blame for that. But it's not all on him either.[/quote]I'd agree with you if I thought he shouldered some of the blame for the red zone struggles. But how many times has he missed a play in the end zone this year? I don't think he has.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=jsarno;598875]First sentence OK, second sentence dead on, third sentence is not accurate. He's NOT a bright spot. If he stepped up and won us a game, then yes, I'd say he was, but he disappeared when we needed him most. Don't know why Campbell's lease is sooooo long when others have had no leash at all.[/quote]Funny how you'll go to the numbers until they don't support your argument. Then they are worthless.

Matty's using fact-based assertions and you aren't. You can't tell him he's wrong.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;598857]So what's the solution? Get rid of all of them just to prove a point? Or try to separate the non-contributors from the ones who can help us win in the future?

I agree that keeping all hands on deck while trying to add different forms of talent is not leading to the place we want it to. But what should we change first?[/quote]

In some ways, I feel like we could be staring at the 1993/1994 seasons all over again. We're old at some pretty pivotal positions, and getting old and ineffective at others. The rest who aren't old just aren't all that great.

And as much as I don't want this to be the case, it looks to me like those three second rounders from a year ago just aren't going to pan out.

This owner doesn't have the patience to go through a complete overhaul and rebuilding process. Instead, he keeps adding pieces to a core that's going to fall apart at some point anyway, and we never really get anywhere. And again, I maintain that the core just isn't very good.

I think it's time to blow the whole thing up.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;598879]I'd agree with you if I thought he shouldered some of the blame for the red zone struggles. But how many times has he missed a play in the end zone this year? I don't think he has.[/quote]

He had a few dropped on him and he's also missed some guys that were open. Maybe not in the red zone but for some long pass plays. So yeah even though he completes a lot of his passes, his stats look good, we're not getting in the end zone. You can't win in the NFL with an offense that scores 13 points a game. That is just embarrassing.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Beemnseven;598881]In some ways, I feel like we could be staring at the 1993/1994 seasons all over again. We're old at some pretty pivotal positions, and getting old and ineffective at others. The rest who aren't old just aren't all that great.

And as much as I don't want this to be the case, it looks to me like those three second rounders from a year ago just aren't going to pan out.

This owner doesn't have the patience to go through a complete overhaul and rebuilding process. Instead, he keeps adding pieces to a core that's going to fall apart at some point anyway, and we never really get anywhere. And again, I maintain that the core just isn't very good.

I think it's time to blow the whole thing up.[/quote]Alright, but even blowing the whole thing up never implies getting rid of 53 players in a single offseason.

So what do you rebuild first? A lot of teams start with the passing offense, but that's a weird situation for us because few teams that lose as consistently as we do have been able to have a source of passing offense each of the last five years (well, 2007 is debatable). So, do we start by tearing up the defense? The offensive line? The running game?

If we choose to rebuild, which seems like a reasonable option, I'm not even sure where we would begin. We don't have a lot of money tied up in our passing game, but that's been our only bright spot this year. And our receivers are, if nothing else, young.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skinsfan69;598882]He had a few dropped on him and he's also missed some guys that were open. Maybe not in the red zone but for some long pass plays. So yeah even though he completes a lot of his passes, his stats look good, we're not getting in the end zone. You can't win in the NFL with an offense that scores 13 points a game. That is just embarrassing.[/quote]No, we need to score more than 13 PPG, but the truth is that the difference between 13 PPG and 19 PPG is just a play or two a game. And sometimes, that can be as simple as having no false starts, kind of like the Giants game.

The last two games, since Thomas got injured, procedure penalties have been kind of a disaster. The offense has regressed since week one and unfortunately, there's no end in sight. I think Campbell can pick up some of the slack, but we're a .500 offense in a best case scenario.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

FIRST, we need to play the young guys and SEE what we have?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=jsarno;598875]First sentence OK, second sentence dead on, third sentence is not accurate. He's NOT a bright spot. If he stepped up and won us a game, then yes, I'd say he was, but he disappeared when we needed him most. [B]Don't know why Campbell's lease is sooooo long when others have had no leash at all.[/quote][/B]

I think changes need to be made if the offense keeps up the lack of scoring. If that means putting in Collins then so be it. He gets the ball out quicker so maybe that wouldn't be such a bad idea.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;598748]Thanks for posting this I have been saying this for a while. Even his stretch last year when he didn't throw an interception for a while. He led the NFL with the "least ints for a minimum of 500 passes thrown. But we will just run him off then he will come back to hunt us landing somewhere in the NFC. Write it down.

People say he doesn't have a quick release. You can't have a quick release when no one is open. You usually hold on the ball too long when no one is open not just because you like how it feels in your hand. JC can't read defenses. How do people know this? He is not a leader? He lead his team to a national championship in college. People just love to hate on this board. Any QB placed in this position would not produce. Maybe if he was a running Qb like Vick and that's only because they would balance out thing with rushing yards. By that meaning when no one is open they can run and when the o-line breaks down they can run.

Quote from Tony Dungy and I would think he knows more about football than all of us.

[B]Dungy:[/B] "It's not always getting the best players. It's building a good team, building a team that everyone has confidence in, and, right now, they don't have confidence." My take: Harrison faced Campbell so his comments are telling. But Dungy is more accurate, that this is bigger than the quarterback. The Redskins can change the QB after this season as well as the coach. If the culture doesn't change, the future won't be much different.[/quote]




He didn't lead Auburn to a National Championship. They got screwed and played my Hokies in the Sugar Bowl and won barely.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Rebuilding would have been a much more sensible option if we hadn't thrown a few billion dollars at Hall and Haynesworth. Now, since you are paying that money no matter what, I don't know how you rebuild at the same time.

If there's one thing that has frustrated me about the last five years of the Redskins, it's the complete dismissal of needing a 'Plan B' because of the undying confidence that 'Plan A' will work.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;598878]Didn't Brandon Lloyd last two years on this team? Now there's a guy who actually never accomplished anything.[/quote]

We didn't rely on Lloyd though...he was a non factor while Campbell touches the ball on every offensive play. That's a really weak arguement.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Hog1;598885]FIRST, we need to play the young guys and SEE what we have?[/quote]

Yeah I'm kind of wondering why Mitchell hasn't seen the field yet.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Great thread, Im glad that Im not the only one that feels this way. Of course playing QB, you are the first one that people "dog" when you lose, and the first one for "kudos" when you win. Some of the stats are padded because they came at trash time, but there have been alot of missed opportunities that could have helped the stats as well that havent been his fault. Im surprised that he is doing so well considering the horrendous playcalling, and the defenses inability to get off the field. The line is giving more time than last year, but still needs to improve so we dont miss those potential big plays.

If Campbell does get away, we will end up regretting it in the long run. The guy has steadily improved, and handled the chaos that is the Redskins like a true professional. I really feel like he could do much better with a better coach and more innovative playcalling.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

When I was looking up Campbell's fourth quarter splits for research prompted by my comments earlier of this thread, I found out something interesting:

According to NFL.com, Jason Campbell did not make a single pass in the fourth quarter with the score anything greater than a 7 point game.

Of course, I don't know how NFL.com was counting the Giants, Ravens, and Steelers games, when that was actually the case, but it's been a little bit different for the Redskins to get down by more than 7 points twice in the first three weeks.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;598880]Funny how you'll go to the numbers until they don't support your argument. Then they are worthless.

Matty's using fact-based assertions and you aren't. You can't tell him he's wrong.[/quote]

How are my comments not fact based? Am I mistaken at the fact that he disappears when we need him most? That he is no where to be found in the redzone? That he leads the league with 5 fumbles? Those are all facts sir. Saying that Campbell is a bright spot is NOT fact based. It's opinion based.

ps- when numbers actually prove a point, then they are good and worthy, when they are used to skew reality, they are not worthy. We both know numbers show things, but they don't show everything. Again...see Mark Brunell.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;598888]Rebuilding would have been a much more sensible option if we hadn't thrown a few billion dollars at Hall and Haynesworth. Now, since you are paying that money no matter what, I don't know how you rebuild at the same time.

If there's one thing that has frustrated me about the last five years of the Redskins, it's the complete dismissal of needing a 'Plan B' because of the undying confidence that 'Plan A' will work.[/quote]

You are definitely right about that.