Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;626262]I'd say that every team that wins the championship can run and play good defense. A lot of them can pass as well.[/quote]

To win a title you have to have a playmaker at the QB spot,not a manager who can make a play here and there. When was the last time a team with a good running game and a avg QB won the SB? And even if you throw out the names Dilfer and Johnson you have to point out the fact that they had great defenses,the type of defenses that dont come along very often that can take over games. it may be another 4+ yrs before you see a defense like those that carry a team to the title but in that time you will see many teams win because of the man throwing the ball.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;626268]I think there's a medium between having league worst protection and receiving, like we currently have, and having everything around him be perfect.

Right now, we have a non-descript figurehead QB. Under the current circumstance, you could replace Campbell with Garcia or Byron Leftwich, and he would just be known as "Washington QB" and the production would be exactly the same. [B]If you improved the units around him to league average, you'd probably have the Campbell of the first half of last year. If you add a great defense to that, then you have a super bowl contender[/B].

Jason Campbell is probably not the type of player who gets better by putting the ball in his hands 50 times a game like Brady or Brees. If he had better ball-securing fundamentals, then maybe. If you put a legitimately great receiver and OL in front of him, you'd probably have something that looks like Steve McNair. Otherwise, you're always going to have to take the good with the bad.[/quote]


Are you serious? He avg'd ONE TD pass a game during that stint. You think that will beat Manning,Brady,Brees,Favre or Warner?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skinsfan69;626165]I think the smart fans don't hate the guy. How can you? He's the type of guy you want to root for and do well. He's not a diva ass punk like CP or Hall. He's nothing but a high character stand up guy. But he's just not a legit NFL starter. He missed 3 TD's yesterday w/ inaccurate throws. I know even the best guys miss stuff but the best guys make more than they miss. [B]W/ JC it's the opposite, he misses more than he makes.[/B][/quote]This is what completion percentage grades a QB on, and Campbell's right dead at the league average.

So in a vacuum, Campbell misses just as often as he makes. Compared to all first round draft pick QBs since his draft year of 2005, the group of guys who "make plays" at a higher rate includes only Cutler, Rodgers, and Flacco.

I looked at first rounders only because if you were to consider using a 2010 first rounder on a QB, you'd expect 2/3 of potential draftees to post a lower career completion % than Campbell, and that's just not helping.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=DBUCHANON101;626279]Are you serious? He avg'd ONE TD pass a game during that stint. You think that will beat Manning,Brady,Brees,Favre or Warner?[/quote]I remember Portis scoring a lot in the red zone then, though I could be wrong.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=DBUCHANON101;626274]To win a title you have to have a playmaker at the QB spot,not a manager who can make a play here and there. When was the last time a team with a good running game and a avg QB won the SB? And even if you throw out the names Dilfer and Johnson you have to point out the fact that they had great defenses,the type of defenses that dont come along very often that can take over games. it may be another 4+ yrs before you see a defense like those that carry a team to the title but in that time you will see many teams win because of the man throwing the ball.[/quote]Brady prior to 2004 was a pretty mediocre QB, and he won two titles before his breakout. Roethlisberger in 2005. Eli in 2007.

How often does one of the top five QBs in the NFL at the time actually win the super bowl? Peyton in 2006, Brady in 2004, Warner in 1999, and like, Favre in 1996? Those teams had playmakers at the QB spot and won, I guess, but in 13 years a top five quarterback (in that year) has won the super bowl four times. That's 30%.

You're wasting your time on this argument. Having a great quarterback and having a great defense are both great weapons in terms of winning playoff games, but balance is way more important.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;626285][B]This is what completion percentage grades a QB on, and Campbell's right dead at the league average.[/B]

So in a vacuum, Campbell misses just as often as he makes. Compared to all first round draft pick QBs since his draft year of 2005, the group of guys who "make plays" at a higher rate includes only Cutler, Rodgers, and Flacco.

I looked at first rounders only because if you were to consider using a 2010 first rounder on a QB, you'd expect 2/3 of potential draftees to post a lower career completion % than Campbell, and that's just not helping.[/quote]

This is where the stat line lies. Yes he had a good completion %, looks like he played a good game but he missed 3 easy TD's yesterday. It only shows up as 3 incomplete passes but the reality is it could've been 21 points. He can make up those incompetions with screens, wr screens and easy short crossing passes. It's the big plays he misses that hurts the offense.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;626288][B]Brady prior to 2004 was a pretty mediocre QB,[/B] and he won two titles before his breakout. Roethlisberger in 2005. Eli in 2007.

How often does one of the top five QBs in the NFL at the time actually win the super bowl? Peyton in 2006, Brady in 2004, Warner in 1999, and like, Favre in 1996? Those teams had playmakers at the QB spot and won, I guess, but in 13 years a top five quarterback (in that year) has won the super bowl four times. That's 30%.

You're wasting your time on this argument. Having a great quarterback and having a great defense are both great weapons in terms of winning playoff games, but balance is way more important.[/quote]

Yeah right. 03 and 04 were pretty damn good years for Brady. Especially when was throwing to Deion Branch, Troy Brown and the guy that left for Tenn that was never heard from again. If JC could put up numbers that Brady did in those years he'd be rewarded with a big raise.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Joe Montana, San Francisco 49ers - SB XXIII
Joe Montana, San Francisco 49ers - SB XXIV
Jeff Hostetler, New York Giants - SB XXV
Mark Rypien, Washington Redskins - SB XXVI
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - SB XXVII
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - SB XXVIII
Steve Young, San Francisco 49ers - SB XXIX
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - SB XXX
Brett Favre, Green Bay Packers - SB XXXI
John Elway, Denver Broncos - SB XXXII
John Elway, Denver Broncos - SB XXXIII
Kurt Warner, St. Louis Rams - SB XXXIV
Trent Dilfer, Baltimore Ravens - SB XXXV
Tom Brady, New England Patriots - SB XXXVI
Brad Johnson, Tampa Bay Buccaneers - SB XXXVII
Tom Brady, New England Patriots - SB XXXVIII
Tom Brady, New England Patriots - SB XXXIX
Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers - SB XL
Peyton Manning, Indianapolis Colts - SB XLI
Eli Manning, New York Giants - SB XLII
Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers - SB XLIII

Past SB winning QB's, id say this is a pretty good list. Nothing avg about them. But once here and there you will find a name that had a GREAT Defense that carried the team to the title but like i said for the most part these guys led their team to the "W". And the ones who rode their defense to the title,how often do you see a defense of that caliber? not very often do you see a defense like that of the 85 Bears, 2000 Ravens, or the Bucs of 2002. In these rare cases i believe these defenses actually outscored the opposing team all by themselves in the SB.
In the post you had earlier where you stated if JC had an avg offensive supporting cast around him he could be a SB contending QB with a great defense. Well i think you would be hard pressed to find a pro QB who wouldnt, and thats the point, that you are more likely to win a title with a top QB with a top 10 defense than you are to have the stars align just right and have a great defense that wins the games for you.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Campbell is on pace this type of season:

299 of 452 (66.1%) for 3,324 yards, 18 TDs and 14 INTs. QB rating of 87.9

It's another year of improvement, career highs in completion %, yards, QB rating, and TDs. All with a subpar offensive line.

So is this a guy we look to move on from? I'm on the fence.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

One thing I am sure of. The Redskins oline has been a major problem for a long long very long time.

The Samuels/Jansen combo was pretty overrated from day one.

The line JC has had the fortune to play behind over his entire pro career has been a vastly overrated unit IMO.

This year the line is just a freakin nightmare. Who knows how good the guy is?

JC isn't any kind of hall of famer, but he has plenty of good skills.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Mattyk72;626302]Campbell is on pace this type of season:

299 of 452 (66.1%) for 3,324 yards, 18 TDs and 14 INTs. QB rating of 87.9

It's another year of improvement, career highs in completion %, yards, QB rating, and TDs. All with a subpar offensive line.

So is this a guy we look to move on from? I'm on the fence.[/quote]

Yeah but how many guys keep the pace they are on for 16 games? And dont forget that the numbers you got for this sample were from the easy part of our schedule. We have a tough road ahead of us.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Good post DB 101. It's the exception to the rule when a "mediocre" QB wins the SB.

The only reason this thread is "revived" is b/c Kyle Orton got hurt and didn't play the 2nd half and LB/the oline had a big game yesterday. JC had an average day.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=DBUCHANON101;626306]Yeah but how many guys keep the pace they are on for 16 games? And dont forget that the numbers you got for this sample were from the easy part of our schedule. We have a tough road ahead of us.[/quote]

Well Denver had the #3 ranked D coming in to yesterday and he had one of his better games statistically, and outside of the KC game he's been pretty consistent.

If the protection is there for him, who knows?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=DBUCHANON101;626300]Joe Montana, San Francisco 49ers - SB XXIII
Joe Montana, San Francisco 49ers - SB XXIV
Jeff Hostetler, New York Giants - SB XXV
Mark Rypien, Washington Redskins - SB XXVI
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - SB XXVII
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - SB XXVIII
Steve Young, San Francisco 49ers - SB XXIX
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - SB XXX
Brett Favre, Green Bay Packers - SB XXXI
John Elway, Denver Broncos - SB XXXII
John Elway, Denver Broncos - SB XXXIII
Kurt Warner, St. Louis Rams - SB XXXIV
Trent Dilfer, Baltimore Ravens - SB XXXV
Tom Brady, New England Patriots - SB XXXVI
Brad Johnson, Tampa Bay Buccaneers - SB XXXVII
Tom Brady, New England Patriots - SB XXXVIII
Tom Brady, New England Patriots - SB XXXIX
Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers - SB XL
Peyton Manning, Indianapolis Colts - SB XLI
Eli Manning, New York Giants - SB XLII
Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers - SB XLIII

Past SB winning QB's, id say this is a pretty good list. Nothing avg about them. But once here and there you will find a name that had a GREAT Defense that carried the team to the title but like i said for the most part these guys led their team to the "W". And the ones who rode their defense to the title,how often do you see a defense of that caliber? not very often do you see a defense like that of the 85 Bears, 2000 Ravens, or the Bucs of 2002. In these rare cases i believe these defenses actually outscored the opposing team all by themselves in the SB.
In the post you had earlier where you stated if JC had an avg offensive supporting cast around him he could be a SB contending QB with a great defense. Well i think you would be hard pressed to find a pro QB who wouldnt, and thats the point, that you are more likely to win a title with a top QB with a top 10 defense than you are to have the stars align just right and have a great defense that wins the games for you.[/quote]

Campbell is a decent QB and he's the best we have. Does it have to be championship level or trash for you? He's not elite and he's not garbage. Trying to make a strong case either way is pretty foolish.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=wilsowilso;626305]One thing I am sure of. The Redskins oline has been a major problem for a long long very long time.

The Samuels/Jansen combo was terribly overrated from day one.

[B]The line JC has played behind over his entire pro career has been a vastly overrated unit IMO[/B].

This year the line is just a freakin nightmare. Who knows how good the guy is?

JC isn't any kind of hall of famer, but he has plenty of good skills.[/quote]

Its the same line that TC used when he took us to the playoffs. and its also the same line that CP ran behind when he was having very good seasons for us. Id say it was above avg until recently when injuries/age began to set in.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Paintrain;626311]Campbell is a decent QB and he's the best we have. Does it have to be championship level or trash for you? He's not elite and he's not garbage. Trying to make a strong case either way is pretty foolish.[/quote]

Im sorry, i thought the goal was to win the SB. History has shown that the chances are pretty unlikely you will do that with a 50/50 QB.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=DBUCHANON101;626312]Its the same line that TC used when he took us to the playoffs. and its also the same line that CP ran behind when he was having very good seasons for us. Id say it was above avg until recently when injuries/age began to set in.[/quote]

The Redskins offense has been bad forever.

I argue that it starts and ends with the oline.

They shouldn't take all the blame, but I think they were kind of fooling us for many years. Just good enough to not get really exposed.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Mattyk72;626302]Campbell is on pace this type of season:

299 of 452 (66.1%) for 3,324 yards, 18 TDs and 14 INTs. QB rating of 87.9

It's another year of improvement, career highs in completion %, yards, QB rating, and TDs. All with a subpar offensive line.

So is this a guy we look to move on from? I'm on the fence.[/quote]

he's missed wide open receivers for TD passes while having ample protection from his o-line far too many times to continue to stick with. He's improved in some areas, but he continues to fumble too much, make poor decisions, and hold on to the ball too long. You put Patrick Ramsey behind a pro-bowl offensive line and he'd be a top 5 quarterback. I'm not kidding. Just about ANY QB can be pro-bowl caliber if his line is good, but that doesn't mean he's a great QB... just the beneficiay of 5 amazing guys protecting his butt. What we have, even with injuries, is a slightly below average offensive line that was average in the second half of last year and top5 in the first half of last year. Campbell hasnt gotten it done consistently no matter how good the o-line in front of him was playing.

Great quarterbacks can play well behind sub-par offensive lines. Look at what payton manning did in 2008 and what rothlesberger is doing now, as just two examples. You can make all the excuses you want for Campbell, but great quarterbacks make the players around them better, and Campbell hasnt done that and never will. Last year, i'd never heard of half the guys who are catching balls from manning now, but they all looked GREAT tonight. They'd look like doo-doo if Campbell was throwing to them.

Campbell isnt the only problem on our offense, but he's probably the biggest. He could go to the pro-bowl behind a great O-line, but it wouldnt be because he's a game winner. he's a game manager. Thats all he's ever been and that's all he'll ever be.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=DBUCHANON101;626322]Im sorry, i thought the goal was to win the SB. History has shown that the chances are pretty unlikely you will do that with a 50/50 QB.[/quote]

Of course that's the goal but by your scale 26 active QB must suck since only 6 active QB are Super Bowl winners. Teams win SB not individuals.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

his problem is that his stat line is fine but the problem is he misses too many wide open wide receivers - he left 2 touchdowns that I saw on the field: the missed bomb to santana moss and the intentional grounding call where he should have seen Yoder wide open 2 yards from the end zone

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Mattyk72;626302]Campbell is on pace this type of season:

299 of 452 (66.1%) for 3,324 yards, 18 TDs and 14 INTs. QB rating of 87.9

It's another year of improvement, career highs in completion %, yards, QB rating, and TDs. All with a subpar offensive line.

So is this a guy we look to move on from? I'm on the fence.[/quote]

He just doesn't make enough plays to win any games for us. I'd rather have a guy that throws more INt's but can give me 25+ td's. JC will never be that kind of guy. He's always going to have low td and int numbers. That's fine if we've got the Ravens defense of 2000. But we don't. Bring in some competition or let Colt compete for the job.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;626328]he's missed wide open receivers for TD passes while having ample protection from his o-line far too many times to continue to stick with. He's improved in some areas, but he continues to fumble too much, make poor decisions, and hold on to the ball too long. You put Patrick Ramsey behind a pro-bowl offensive line and he'd be a top 5 quarterback. I'm not kidding. Just about ANY QB can be pro-bowl caliber if his line is good, but that doesn't mean he's a great QB... just the beneficiay of 5 amazing guys protecting his butt. What we have, even with injuries, is a slightly below average offensive line that was average in the second half of last year and top5 in the first half of last year. Campbell hasnt gotten it done consistently no matter how good the o-line in front of him was playing.

Great quarterbacks can play well behind sub-par offensive lines. Look at what payton manning did in 2008 and what rothlesberger is doing now, as just two examples. You can make all the excuses you want for Campbell, but great quarterbacks make the players around them better, and Campbell hasnt done that and never will. Last year, i'd never heard of half the guys who are catching balls from manning now, but they all looked GREAT tonight. They'd look like doo-doo if Campbell was throwing to them.

[B][I]Campbell isnt the only problem on our offense, but he's probably the biggest. He could go to the pro-bowl behind a great O-line, but it wouldnt be because he's a game winner. he's a game manager. Thats all he's ever been and that's all he'll ever be[/I][/B].[/quote]
As documented earlier in this thread, Zorn calling plays 13.1 PPG, Lewis calling plays 20.3 PPG. Same QB but the offense improves by over a TD per game and he's the biggest problem? The OL isn't a bigger problem? Leading the league in drops isn't a bigger problem? JC is far, very far, from perfect but he's also far from our biggest offensive problem.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Paintrain;6263410] Teams win SB not individuals.[/quote]

ah..but the question here is...can the right individual get the team over the hump to win the sb? I have no doubts all 55 men are needed...BUT when you have that one guy that is a true leader, that you truly truly believe can take you to the summit...it pushes you a little more.
This...is what jc lacks

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

It's funny that this discussion has become Jason Campbell Haters vs. People that think Jason Campbell is an average at best/mediocre all the time QB.

Jason Campbell haters are upset that JC is not having a horrible statistical season, and would like nothing more to rub it in to former Campbell supporters (notice that I said former). But when JC is having a pretty season statistically, it's really hard to completely rub it in...although once again, most supporters of JC are now former supporters.

JC haters also continue to make the indirect argument that Campbell is the only reason this team is in the shape it is right now, once again completely overlooking other aspects of the team that are completely wrong. Once again, they have the mentality that 1 good QB + sorry ass team = Championship.

As I said, I'm in the JC is an average at best/mediocre all the time QB. I don't think he's going to be back next year and wish him the best. That being said, I have enough of a brain to not babble that he's the doom of the Redskins, and ignore his stats. I also don't forget that the Redskins have never been a passing team, and the team has put all its eggs in the running game (Portis), and the defense (Haynesworth, Orakpo, etc., etc.).

If all of you that loathe Jason Campbell (because he's not Brady, Brees, or P. Manning) want to see a change, well then you better hope the team starts building up the offensive line, and spend a lot of resources on an elite QB. That hasn't been the philosophy, otherwise Gibbs would have not brought Brunnel.

So stop getting your panties in a bunch JC haters, don't forget that he will be gone next season, or at worst, he'll be carrying the clipboard as the 2nd stringer.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

It's a QB league, just looking at the standings in no order

Tony Romo
Kurt Warner
Drew Brees
P Manning
T Brady
Rivers
Orton
Favre
Ben R and McNabb are 2nd in their divisions

Orton is the guy that jumps out as the odd one there. All of the other teams....good/great QB's. Occasionally you'll get an Orton or a Dilfer. I'd rather win more often than occasionally. Let's look for a new QB that has the potential to be great.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=redsk1;626358]It's a QB league, just looking at the standings in no order

Tony Romo
Kurt Warner
Drew Brees
P Manning
T Brady
Rivers
Orton
Favre
Ben R and McNabb are 2nd in their divisions

Orton is the guy that jumps out as the odd one there. All of the other teams....good/great QB's. Occasionally you'll get an Orton or a Dilfer. I'd rather win more often than occasionally. Let's look for a new QB that has the potential to be great.[/quote]

exactly. don't forget carson palmer.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=redsk1;626358]It's a QB league, just looking at the standings in no order

Tony Romo
Kurt Warner
Drew Brees
P Manning
T Brady
Rivers
Orton
Favre
Palmer
Ben R and McNabb are 2nd in their divisions

Orton is the guy that jumps out as the odd one there. All of the other teams....good/great QB's. Occasionally you'll get an Orton or a Dilfer. I'd rather win more often than occasionally. Let's look for a new QB that has the potential to be great.[/quote]

So I guess it comes to this, if you plugged ANY of those QB on our current roster, system and organizational structure in a one for one trade, would they automatically make us a SB contender and would JC automatically make them an also ran?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;626328] You put Patrick Ramsey behind a pro-bowl offensive line and he'd be a top 5 quarterback. I'm not kidding. [B]Just about ANY QB can be pro-bowl caliber if his line is good[/B], but that doesn't mean he's a great QB... just the beneficiay of 5 amazing guys protecting his butt. What we have, even with injuries, is a slightly below average offensive line that was average in the second half of last year and top5 in the first half of last year. Campbell hasnt gotten it done consistently no matter how good the o-line in front of him was playing.
[/quote]

Tell that to Tavaris Jackson. Minnesota had a great defense, a great running game, and a very good OLine, but he still looked gawdawful. As far as not seeing wide open guys, every QB does that occasionally. Campbell does it more than most, but it takes time to get through reads that he often doesn't have.

I'm pretty much sitting on the fence with Campbell. I'm curious to see how he looks the rest of the way with Jones/Heyer at LT/RT (a big upgrade over Heyer/Williams), especially if Betts continues to start at RB. Either way, the OLine needs to be addressed before they go waste a high draft pick on a QB that will turn into David Carr 2.0 with the terrible line we have now.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=redskinfan401;626378]Tell that to Tavaris Jackson. Minnesota had a great defense, a great running game, and a very good OLine, but he still looked gawdawful. As far as not seeing wide open guys, every QB does that occasionally. Campbell does it more than most, but it takes time to get through reads that he often doesn't have.

I'm pretty much sitting on the fence with Campbell. I'm curious to see how he looks the rest of the way with Jones/Heyer at LT/RT (a big upgrade over Heyer/Williams), especially if Betts continues to start at RB. [B]Either way, the OLine needs to be addressed before they go waste a high draft pick on a QB that will turn into David Carr 2.0 with the terrible line we have now.[/B][/quote]I don't know why this isn't more glaringly obvious. Get the O-Line fixed [B]before[/B] we worry about a QB. The line is horrible, if that's not fixed it doesn't matter who we put in the doggone pocket.

Still, I honestly believe Campbell is gone after the season regardless of how he looks over the next seven games (too much damage has been done, for his own good I think he should leave this club), and I honestly believe we are gonna waste a pick on a QB who will suffer behind another patchwork line in 2010.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=redskinfan401;626378]Tell that to Tavaris Jackson. Minnesota had a great defense, a great running game, and a very good OLine, but he still looked gawdawful. As far as not seeing wide open guys, every QB does that occasionally. Campbell does it more than most, but it takes time to get through reads that he often doesn't have.

[B]I'm pretty much sitting on the fence with Campbell. I'm curious to see how he looks the rest of the way with Jones/Heyer at LT/RT (a big upgrade over Heyer/Williams), especially if Betts continues to start at RB. Either way, the OLine needs to be addressed before they go waste a high draft pick on a QB that will turn into David Carr 2.0 with the terrible line we have now[/B].[/quote]

Like I said, Campbell will be gone next year...the question is whether the next FO will address the offensive line before or after addressing the QB position. I'm afraid that they'll have the mentality of some of the people here and bring in a first round QB instead of a first round tackle.

[quote=ashvirtually;626384]I don't know why this isn't more glaringly obvious. Get the O-Line fixed [B]before[/B] we worry about a QB. The line is horrible, if that's not fixed it doesn't matter who we put in the doggone pocket.

[B]Still, I honestly believe Campbell is gone after the season regardless of how he looks over the next seven games (too much damage has been done, for his own good I think he should leave this club), and I honestly believe we are gonna waste a pick on a QB who will suffer behind another patchwork line in 2010.[/B][/quote]

Well said, yet the JC haters a.k.a. min-Snyders for some reason think he'll be around.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Ruhskins;626385]Like I said, Campbell will be gone next year...the question is whether the next FO will address the offensive line before or after addressing the QB position. I'm afraid that they'll have the mentality of some of the people here and bring in a first round QB instead of a first round tackle.



Well said, yet the JC haters a.k.a. min-Snyders for some reason think he'll be around.[/quote]

I'm not a JC hater and I think there is a good chance you see him sign a one to two year with us next year. If they go oline with top picks then he might be your best option. Plus this might be the only place he gets a chance to start and build his worth.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skinsfan69;626291]This is where the stat line lies. Yes he had a good completion %, looks like he played a good game but he missed 3 easy TD's yesterday. It only shows up as 3 incomplete passes but the reality is it could've been 21 points. He can make up those incompetions with screens, wr screens and easy short crossing passes. It's the big plays he misses that hurts the offense.[/quote]Coulda, woulda, shoulda. He missed the plays, true, but it's not binary "either TD or incomplete pass." There's perfect throws, bad throws, and everything in between. Campbell usually falls somewhere in the middle.

And once a pass is incomplete, it absolutely cannot be made up with a screen pass. A missed deep ball and a completed screen pass is still 50%, not 100%.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skinsfan69;626297]Yeah right. 03 and 04 were pretty damn good years for Brady. Especially when was throwing to Deion Branch, Troy Brown and the guy that left for Tenn that was never heard from again. If JC could put up numbers that Brady did in those years he'd be rewarded with a big raise.[/quote]Do look it up. Brady's 2003 and Campbell's 2008 are near-identical.

[url=http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CampJa00.htm]Jason Campbell NFL & AFL Football Statistics | Pro-Football-Reference.com[/url]

[url=http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BradTo00.htm]Tom Brady NFL & AFL Football Statistics | Pro-Football-Reference.com[/url]

Brady really broke out in 2004, as previously pointed out.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=DBUCHANON101;626300]Joe Montana, San Francisco 49ers - SB XXIII
Joe Montana, San Francisco 49ers - SB XXIV
Jeff Hostetler, New York Giants - SB XXV
Mark Rypien, Washington Redskins - SB XXVI
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - SB XXVII
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - SB XXVIII
Steve Young, San Francisco 49ers - SB XXIX
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - SB XXX
Brett Favre, Green Bay Packers - SB XXXI
John Elway, Denver Broncos - SB XXXII
John Elway, Denver Broncos - SB XXXIII
Kurt Warner, St. Louis Rams - SB XXXIV
Trent Dilfer, Baltimore Ravens - SB XXXV
Tom Brady, New England Patriots - SB XXXVI
Brad Johnson, Tampa Bay Buccaneers - SB XXXVII
Tom Brady, New England Patriots - SB XXXVIII
Tom Brady, New England Patriots - SB XXXIX
Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers - SB XL
Peyton Manning, Indianapolis Colts - SB XLI
Eli Manning, New York Giants - SB XLII
Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers - SB XLIII

Past SB winning QB's, id say this is a pretty good list. Nothing avg about them. But once here and there you will find a name that had a GREAT Defense that carried the team to the title but like i said for the most part these guys led their team to the "W". And the ones who rode their defense to the title,how often do you see a defense of that caliber? not very often do you see a defense like that of the 85 Bears, 2000 Ravens, or the Bucs of 2002. In these rare cases i believe these defenses actually outscored the opposing team all by themselves in the SB.
In the post you had earlier where you stated if JC had an avg offensive supporting cast around him he could be a SB contending QB with a great defense. Well i think you would be hard pressed to find a pro QB who wouldnt, and thats the point, that you are more likely to win a title with a top QB with a top 10 defense than you are to have the stars align just right and have a great defense that wins the games for you.[/quote]Thing is though, the stars have to align for any super bowl winner these days, mostly because the era of the dominant team died in the late 90's.

The NFL these days is an oligarchy of sorts. You have the teams that get it, and they are concentrated mostly in the AFC, which gives the illusion of parity. Since 2000, the Steelers, Patriots, Colts have pretty much represented the AFC every year, exceptions to where the Raiders broke through in a down year and the Ravens big defensive year. But in the NFC, you've gotten basically a different team every year.

The stars align for someone in the NFC every year. It's been the Giants twice, the Bucs, the Rams, the Panthers, the Eagles, the Seahawks, the Bears, and now the Cardinals. In 1998, the Falcons went. That's half the conference. If there's been a dominant QB among the bunch, it's been Kurt Warner. Having Tony Romo has not helped the Cowboys get anywhere. McNabb's been one of the more successful playoff QBs of all time, and it hasn't mattered much. Jake Delhomme and Kerry Collins were neither great quarterbacks, nor did they have great defenses in those years. Rex Grossman?!

You combine all of the super bowl appearences for the best QBs in the NFC over the last decade: Romo, Brees, McNabb, Favre, Culpepper, Marc Bulger, Warner, Hasselbeck...it's roughly half the time that the NFC is represented by a team with an above average QB, or at least a guy who was as good as 08 Campbell. Chris Chandler, Collins, Johnson, Delhomme, Grossman, and Eli have all been there in subpar years, mostly because they had quality individuals on both sides of the ball.

It's not quarterback play that progresses in the playoffs. Considering that it's not the best quarterbacks that get to the playoffs against the best teams, the only reason the trend seems to hold is because the best teams in the AFC every year also have the best quarterbacks. If you took the QBs away, they would still be the best teams: Steelers, Ravens, Titans, Colts, Patriots. Every year. They'd just be closer to the pack.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

The only guys on the SB list who were actually drafted into a bad situation were Aikman and Manning, but they were both systematic highly drafted rebuilding pieces. Even there, a plan was in place. Right now, the Redskins are directionless, which makes the quarterback discussion sort of moot.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Anyone who wants to criticize Campbell should use the Carson Palmer comparison, since Palmer has played with great offenses and crappy offenses since taking over as the Bengals starter in 2004. Palmer didn't always play well as the offense of that 2005 season began to fall apart, and frankly, after he missed 2008 with injury, people started to doubt his franchise quarterback-ness.

This year, he's back to being one of the ten most valuable quarterbacks in football.

The other part of the comparison is that if the Bengals were the Redskins, they might have cut or traded him after last season.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;626438]Do look it up. Brady's 2003 and Campbell's 2008 are near-identical.

[URL="http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CampJa00.htm"]Jason Campbell NFL & AFL Football Statistics | Pro-Football-Reference.com[/URL]

[URL="http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BradTo00.htm"]Tom Brady NFL & AFL Football Statistics | Pro-Football-Reference.com[/URL]

Brady really broke out in 2004, as previously pointed out.[/quote]

The numbers are not near identical. Brady was clearly better in 02 and 03. And that's not a knock on JC.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

campbell still is the same qb he has allways been, he is an average qb, and he could win with the right situation around him. what i see week in and week out is a qb who can manage a game and nothing more, i would love nothing more than to see it all finally click and have him start making all of his passes instead of skipping some on the ground, over throwing others, and not seeing wide open receivers on, just don't think that will happen, he has too many things to over come this far into his career

My apologies to JC.
 

OK I have been a little harsh to say the least on Jason Campbell, during the past offseason when we were "Secretly" shopping around for Jay Cutler or Mark Sanchez, I was all for it. In fact I was down and out when we didn't get either one of those guys. I dogged JC all Preseason and Everygame this season.. But now that half of this season is over I have looked back at all 3 QB's STATS, Jason has a better Passer rating than both and has way less INT's than both. Jason has only 4 less td passes than Cutler and has 1 more than Sanchez. Even with a HORRIBLE and INJURED Oline, and a young recieveing core, (outside of Moss.) So I must Give props to JC because god know's I have trashed him so much this season, I know he won't be here next yr and I don't think he's a Legit starter in this league anyway, but still he has earned my props..

Re: My apologies to JC.
 

Thank God that there is some one out there who can still think for themselves and see what is true. I've ben saying all season that he's better than what people are giving him credit for. Is JC the best QB in the league, NO! Is JC the worst QB in the leageue, NO! The ignorant fans will miss what they had once it's gone.