Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

It seemed to me that JC made 3 1st down throws that were dropped (Thrash, Kelly, Ell), that was all in the first half because I couldn't watch after JC interception in the 3rd Qrt. Yes, probably not the best pass but nothing else was working and we were down by alot and he needed to 'force' something.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;506057]Jason played at an outstanding level in four games, poorly in four games and okay in two games. That, to me, is reason enough to give him more time to prove himself. To those who think otherwise, please consider the following:

[B](1) Jason is a FAR superior QB than his predecessors[/B]. In the past decade or so I have suffered through Heath Shuler Gus Frerotte, Jeff George, Tony Banks, Shane Matthews, Patrick Ramsey, Danny Wuerfel, Tim Hasselbeck and a few others. Jason is, by far, the best of the bunch. The thought of going through another decade or so searching for a better option at quarterback makes me sick to my stomach.

[B](2) Quality free agent QBs don't grow on trees[/B]. In the past few years, how many teams have found a quality, young quarterback in free agency? Not many. New Orleans is the only team I can think of, and they took a MAJOR gamble in signing Brees. He signed a monster contract after coming off of an injury that threatened his career. How many great QBs are hitting the free agent market this offseason? None. Matt Cassel will likely hit free agency, but if JC doesn't please you, neither will Matt Cassel.

[B](3) Colt is NOT ready[/B]. Yes, we all know Colt Brennan has that "it" boy quality. But, that "it" factor doesn't mean squat. One day he might be a fine QB, but he's not there yet. He looked great in 2 games and struggled mightily in 2 others against 3rd stringers (many of whom have never played a single down in a regular season NFL game). If he struggled to move the ball and put up decent stats against guys who couldn't make other teams' practice squads, what in the world makes you think he'll excel against starting NFL defensive units? Yes, I am aware of the whole "he was drafted in the 6th round like Tom Brady" argument. However, not only is that argument unpersuasive, it's grade A tarded. So please spare me that garbage.

The point isn't that Jason is the best quarterback. The point is Jason is the best option we have right now, and he'll likely be the best option we have next season as well.[/quote]

Stop with all the common sense, logic and level headed thinking! Don't you realize that Campbell has the ability to make his receivers catch balls that hit them right in the hands or numbers? Don't you realize that Campbell should be running this offense like Brady, Manning, etc? Why can't Campbell make Thomas and Kelly learn a new offense (while he is learning it) run perfect routes and catch every ball thrown their way? Wow man, you just don't get it do you?

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

IMO the jury is still out on JC. He is obviously not Elway and is not going to win games on his own, but he still makes plays when given time. He is an average QB and hopefully will improve thou time is running out for him to take that step.

But in fairness our oline sucks. Teams can rush 4-5 guys and get pressure on Campbell which means they have 6-7 guys covering the pass. Notice how every receiver seems to have 3 defenders around them even thou Campbell is having to scramble or get rid of the ball because of the pressure. Bottom line our pass protection just sucks and that isn't Campbell's fault. Teams don't even need to blitz us anymore to get pressure.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

Well I'm definitely NOT about replacing him. But he still manages to be very indecisive at times and his over use of the pump fake is getting outta hand. Oh...would be nice to not stare down the receiver the entire time you know your going to be throwing to him.
That being said.....
Of course the O-line is somewhat responsible as well. But he still is missing something....I think its time in a system.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

The announcer yesterday said that JC was dropping back way too far and that he was going back right into the area that the Giants ends were driving into. Sure enough on the very next play I watched as he dropped back so far that he was in the way of his linemen pushing the Giants ends around the pocket. If he would have only dropped back have the distance he would have had a nice pocket to throw from. I saw this happen on several plays and I guess not one of the coaches noticed telling him he was dropping back into sacks. So on some of the plays where the Giants ends got preasure it was not our O lines fault.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=Takeuon;506109]Well I'm definitely NOT about replacing him. But he still manages to be very indecisive at times and his over use of the pump fake is getting outta hand. Oh...would be nice to not stare down the receiver the entire time you know your going to be throwing to him.
That being said.....
Of course the O-line is somewhat responsible as well. But he still is missing something....I think its time in a system.[/quote]

The unfortunate part is that he's been in the league awhile now and still makes the same mistakes any rookie makes. I just dont see JC making the progress that need to be made.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=irish;506116]The unfortunate part is that he's been in the league awhile now and still makes the same mistakes any rookie makes. I just dont see JC making the progress that need to be made.[/quote]

Can you point out 3 "rookie" mistakes that Campbell made yesterday that contributed to the loss?

Apparently you are more knowledgeable than Coach Zorn who sees tremendous progress in Campbell. [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/26/AR2008112603902.html]washingtonpost.com[/url]

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

JC has shown considerable progress this year, just look at the completion %, INT % (and the decrease in fumbles too), and overall QB rating.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=Paintrain;506119]Can you point out 3 "rookie" mistakes that Campbell made yesterday that contributed to the loss?

Apparently you are more knowledgeable than Coach Zorn who sees tremendous progress in Campbell. [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/26/AR2008112603902.html]washingtonpost.com[/url][/quote]

Dropping too deep, locking onto receivers, poor decision making. What's Zorn going to say, he stinks? He would never say that to the media and currently JC is the best QB (for better or worse) that the Skins have. I still think if JZ or Snyder could get Kassel or even Brady in some kind of trade they would do it in a minute.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=irish;506130]Dropping too deep, locking onto receivers, poor decision making. What's Zorn going to say, he stinks? He would never say that to the media and currently JC is the best QB (for better or worse) that the Skins have. I still think if JZ or Snyder could get Kassel or even Brady in some kind of trade they would do it in a minute.[/quote]

Dropping too deep?? Do you understand ANYTHING about the QB position?

So you see him locking onto receivers but Zorn says, if anything, he moves off his receivers too quickly? Hmm..

Specifically what poor decisions is he making? Last I checked he's got the fewest interceptions of a starting QB in the league. Doesn't that reflect good decision making?

Zorn is unfailingly honest. If Campbell was stinking, he'd say it. When everyone killed Thomas for dropping the 1st down against Dallas, Zorn put it completely on Campbell. When Sellers dropped the TD last week, Zorn put it on Campbell. He's not coddling JC in the media to protect his feelings.

It'd really be simpler if you just said you don't like Campbell, never have and never will rather than trying to formulate an argument that clearly has zero merit.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=firstdown;506113]The announcer yesterday said that JC was dropping back way too far and that he was going back right into the area that the Giants ends were driving into. Sure enough on the very next play I watched as he dropped back so far that he was in the way of his linemen pushing the Giants ends around the pocket. If he would have only dropped back have the distance he would have had a nice pocket to throw from. I saw this happen on several plays and I guess not one of the coaches noticed telling him he was dropping back into sacks. So on some of the plays where the Giants ends got preasure it was not our O lines fault.[/quote]

I always thought that the number of steps taken by the QB on any given play is usually dictated by the coach. Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought some plays call for 3 step drops, others 7 step drops, and others no steps at all (i.e., plays from shotgun).

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;506140]I always thought that the number of steps taken by the QB on any given play is usually dictated by the coach. Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought some plays call for 3 step drops, others 7 step drops, and others no steps at all (i.e., plays from shotgun).[/quote]Yeah, it's offense 101 that the playcall dictates the QB action.

Campbell has been struggling on shorter drops because the receivers very often do not run off the coverage on their 5-7 yard routes and then Campbell looks sort of confused on where to go with the football, [I]because it's supposed to be a given throw[/I]. He's smart enough to not throw the football, but not experienced enough to understand what he can and can't do with it to avoid intentional grounding.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=irish;506130]Dropping too deep, locking onto receivers, poor decision making. What's Zorn going to say, he stinks? He would never say that to the media and currently JC is the best QB (for better or worse) that the Skins have. I still think if JZ or Snyder could get Kassel or even Brady in some kind of trade they would do it in a minute.[/quote]Cassel isn't anywhere near Campbell, right now at least. He's just in a much better offense.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=Paintrain;506134]Dropping too deep?? Do you understand ANYTHING about the QB position?

So you see him locking onto receivers but Zorn says, if anything, he moves off his receivers too quickly? Hmm..

Specifically what poor decisions is he making? Last I checked he's got the fewest interceptions of a starting QB in the league. Doesn't that reflect good decision making?

Zorn is unfailingly honest. If Campbell was stinking, he'd say it. When everyone killed Thomas for dropping the 1st down against Dallas, Zorn put it completely on Campbell. When Sellers dropped the TD last week, Zorn put it on Campbell. He's not coddling JC in the media to protect his feelings.

It'd really be simpler if you just said you don't like Campbell, never have and never will rather than trying to formulate an argument that clearly has zero merit.[/quote]

If you think Zorn would make a very negative comment about his QB to the media or fans you are crazy. I dont care how honest Zorn comes off to the media, he knows what he's saying and more importantly how he's saying it.

I understand that JC has the fewest ints. IMO thats more of a factor that he's throwing such short passes (more like long handoffs) than his superb decision making.

I dont really care for JC and dont think he will ever be more than a mediocre QB in the NFL. That said, he's the best QB the Skins have.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=GTripp0012;506161]Cassel isn't anywhere near Campbell, right now at least. He's just in a much better offense.[/quote]

Cassel and JC are about the same and you are correct, NE has a better O.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

franchise quarterbacks are hard to find. There are probaly only 10 or so true fran qbs (brady, eil and peyton manning, brees, romo (borderline), favre, big ben) and when you get one you hang onto him b/c he can make up for your teams shortcomings in other areas like pass pro (audibles and getting rid of the ball), makes poor play calls look smart, makes wr who cant get open the ball . . .

JC is not the problem but hes not really a solution either. He needs good OL play and portis raking up 150 plus yards to look good. poor oline play and an injured portis and he looks bad.

JC is better than most options avail to us and while i agree that he doesnt seem to have that "it" factor yet to win a few games himself he still has enough positives to give us hope he can make it click. sometimes it just takes awhile for "it" to click, other times a qb has "it" right away and he is a fran qb and future HOF in the making . . JC is not that guy but that guy is very rare and hard to find.

while a franchise can spend 20 years looking but never finding that elusive hidden treasure you can never stop looking. a fran qb makes everyone around him better and can carry a less than perfect team to the SB . . . with JC (a game manager) we need a perfect team to get to the SB.

go skins!!

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=Paintrain;506134]Dropping too deep?? Do you understand ANYTHING about the QB position?

So you see him locking onto receivers but Zorn says, if anything, he moves off his receivers too quickly? Hmm..

Specifically what poor decisions is he making? Last I checked he's got the fewest interceptions of a starting QB in the league. Doesn't that reflect good decision making?

Zorn is unfailingly honest. If Campbell was stinking, he'd say it. When everyone killed Thomas for dropping the 1st down against Dallas, Zorn put it completely on Campbell. When Sellers dropped the TD last week, Zorn put it on Campbell. He's not coddling JC in the media to protect his feelings.

It'd really be simpler if you just said you don't like Campbell, never have and never will rather than trying to formulate an argument that clearly has zero merit.[/quote]
The fewest interceptions but he is also ranked near the bottom with only 10 TD passes. I think the low int's is also a lack of confidence in making plays on the field and taking the nessary chances to move the ball. Now I don't want him throwing it up with a short field but as we drive down field he needs to make those passes to keep the chains moving at times.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

I am asking a question here, not being sarcastic. Does Atlanta or Baltimore have better recievers or olinemen? I think the real difference that has turned those teams around is the QB. I just get so frustrated with Campbell not throwing the ball sometimes. I look at the Ravens and the Falcons and it seams to me that the difference from this year to last, is that they have good QBs.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=over the mountain;506170]franchise quarterbacks are hard to find. There are probaly only 10 or so true fran qbs (brady, eil and peyton manning, brees, romo (borderline), favre, big ben) and when you get one you hang onto him b/c he can make up for your teams shortcomings in other areas like pass pro (audibles and getting rid of the ball), makes poor play calls look smart, makes wr who cant get open the ball . . .

JC is not the problem but hes not really a solution either. He needs good OL play and portis raking up 150 plus yards to look good. poor oline play and an injured portis and he looks bad.

JC is better than most options avail to us and while i agree that he doesnt seem to have that "it" factor yet to win a few games himself he still has enough positives to give us hope he can make it click. sometimes it just takes awhile for "it" to click, other times a qb has "it" right away and he is a fran qb and future HOF in the making . . JC is not that guy but that guy is very rare and hard to find.

while a franchise can spend 20 years looking but never finding that elusive hidden treasure you can never stop looking. a fran qb makes everyone around him better and can carry a less than perfect team to the SB . . . with JC (a game manager) we need a perfect team to get to the SB.

go skins!![/quote]I disagree that franchise QBs are hard to find. Consider: Brady, Manning, Manning, Palmer, Rivers, Favre, Pennington, Garrard, Roethlisberger, Ryan, Cutler, Romo, McNabb, Brees, Rodgers, Hasselbeck, Warner, Bulger circa 2004, and Campbell, with Flacco, Quinn, Schaub, Edwards, Orton, Leinart, and Henne all knocking on the door.

Obviously, not all franchise QBs are created equal, but the teams that don't have one are at a significant disadvantage. And some people here want the Redskins to move back towards the Minnesota's and San Francisco's of the world, where they flounder in between QBs for ten years only serving to replace the current guy with the next hot thing.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=T.O.Killa;506188]I am asking a question here, not being sarcastic. Does Atlanta or Baltimore have better recievers or olinemen? I think the real difference that has turned those teams around is the QB. I just get so frustrated with Campbell not throwing the ball sometimes. I look at the Ravens and the Falcons and it seams to me that the difference from this year to last, is that they have good QBs.[/quote]Yes, Atlanta and Baltimore absoultely are better at the receivers and on the lines than we are. By how much is debateable, but it seems to be noticeable, at least.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=GTripp0012;506193]Yes, Atlanta and Baltimore absoultely are better at the receivers and on the lines than we are. By how much is debateable, but it seems to be noticeable, at least.[/quote]
I know very little about Atlanta's players, butthe Ravens line has been decimated by injuries and they have started there 1st year gaurd at left tackle. I would rather have Randle El and Moss over Clayton and Mason. I like Mason as a possesion reciever, but still think we have the advantage.

Ranked:
Moss 12th Mason 14th
Randel El 48th Calyton 52nd
Not to mention Cooley 28th

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

Ravens are ranked 27th in the leauge in passing. Flacco has had very few 200+ yard games in passing. Maybe they have had shorter fields to go, but they also faced a bunch of weak teams...

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;506200]Ravens are ranked 27th in the leauge in passing. Flacco has had very few 200+ yard games in passing. Maybe they have had shorter fields to go, but they also faced a bunch of weak teams...[/quote]
He is making passes when he needs to and he is a rookie getting better every week. With Flacco 8-4 without 6-10.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=GTripp0012;506192]I disagree that franchise QBs are hard to find. Consider: Brady, Manning, Manning, Palmer, Rivers, Favre, Pennington, Garrard, Roethlisberger, Ryan, Cutler, Romo, McNabb, Brees, Rodgers, Hasselbeck, Warner, Bulger circa 2004, and Campbell, with Flacco, Quinn, Schaub, Edwards, Orton, Leinart, and Henne all knocking on the door.

Obviously, not all franchise QBs are created equal, but the teams that don't have one are at a significant disadvantage. And some people here want the Redskins to move back towards the Minnesota's and San Francisco's of the world, where they flounder in between QBs for ten years only serving to replace the current guy with the next hot thing.[/quote]

I guess i have a higher standard for what i consider a fran qb: someone who makes the players around him better and has a proven track record of success.

garrard, ryan, rivers, cutler, rodgers and campbell are a group of good qbs who may or may not become fran qbs imo.

warner, mcnabb and bulger used to be fran qbs even though warner is still playing at a high level.

pennington was never a fran qb in my mind, good but never turned great.

flacco, leinart, quinn, schaub, and others havent done anything of real merit to even start to assess their abilities.

NO I DEF DO NOT WANT TO GO BACK TO THE WAY THINGS WERE after we let brad johnson go. the last ten years have been hard to take with the weurfels and matthews of the world. I like campbell alot and believe he is a good qb which gives us the chance of building a winning team around him, teams like SF or the lions have zero hope of success no mater how much talent they surround their current qbs with. that being said, the current JC will not win or lose games for us hence we wollow in average until we build a winning team around him.

like i said JC is not the problem but hes not a solution either. there are only a handful of players who could make this current group of skins SB contenders and JC isnt one of them and we shouldnt blame JC for not being that guy as that guy is rare.

go skins!!

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

Folks:

There is at least a 30% chance that the Eagles would trade Donovan McNabb at the end of this season.


SUPPOSE the Eagles offered an even-up trade:

McNabb for LaRon Landry.


Anyone here want to take that trade to get McNabb???

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

Big no to McNabb, that makes no sense.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=T.O.Killa;506202]He is making passes when he needs to and he is a rookie getting better every week. With Flacco 8-4 without 6-10.[/quote]

livin in bmore ive watched alot of the ravens and this year they have been healthier at the cb than last year (they still are dinged up alot) and rookie coach harbaugh isnt asking flacco to win games, instead hes asking him to manage games by putting him in managebale situations much like the pats did with cassel early on. so far flacco has responded well and seems to have a bright future.

plus their D is still a wrecking ball of a unit even with gregg out.

when we play them it will be a great game.

go skins!!

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;506208]Folks:

There is at least a 30% chance that the Eagles would trade Donovan McNabb at the end of this season.


SUPPOSE the Eagles offered an even-up trade:

McNabb for LaRon Landry.


Anyone here want to take that trade to get McNabb???[/quote]

No way.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

Matty:

I agree that the Skins should not take that trade - - but for those who think Campbell is not up to the job, this would be a potential "quick fix".

And we do know that the Skins have been known to jump at the "quick fix" option in the past...

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;506208]Folks:

There is at least a 30% chance that the Eagles would trade Donovan McNabb at the end of this season.


SUPPOSE the Eagles offered an even-up trade:

McNabb for LaRon Landry.


Anyone here want to take that trade to get McNabb???[/quote]

You can't be serious? First of all that's a big trade in the division and that just doesn't happen. Secondly haven't we had enough old players from other teams for one lifetime.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

hell no laRon is a young beast and mcnabb is old and is on the downslope

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=Paintrain;506134]Dropping too deep?? Do you understand ANYTHING about the QB position?

So you see him locking onto receivers but Zorn says, if anything, he moves off his receivers too quickly? Hmm..

Specifically what poor decisions is he making? Last I checked he's got the fewest interceptions of a starting QB in the league. Doesn't that reflect good decision making?

Zorn is unfailingly honest. If Campbell was stinking, he'd say it. When everyone killed Thomas for dropping the 1st down against Dallas, Zorn put it completely on Campbell. When Sellers dropped the TD last week, Zorn put it on Campbell. He's not coddling JC in the media to protect his feelings.

It'd really be simpler if you just said you don't like Campbell, never have and never will rather than trying to formulate an argument that clearly has zero merit.[/quote]


But thats the one thing i love about Tony Romo he does drop deep also but he knows how to side step and step forward into the pocket. Campbell does drop too deep sometimes but once it collapse he goes into panic mode.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=wilsowilso;506231]You can't be serious? First of all that's a big trade in the division and that just doesn't happen. Secondly haven't we had enough old players from other teams for one lifetime.[/quote]


I agree. Damn why get a man that is on the downside of his career as a starter when you need to find your franchise guy ala Theismann, Jorgensen, etc? Evaluate JC the rest of the way, look at potential diamonds in the rough in the draft and young QB FAs, and let open the QB spot up for the best man. I pushed for JC over Brunell since we drafted him, but it looks like his early detractors were right about him benefitting at Auburn from having two 1st round HBs lining up behind him. It is hard to justify giving this guy 7 years to learn the pro game, when Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco, rookies, can seemingly ease into the position and excel off the bat.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;506200]Ravens are ranked 27th in the leauge in passing. Flacco has had very few 200+ yard games in passing. Maybe they have had shorter fields to go, but they also faced a bunch of weak teams...[/quote]Well, 4th year Campbell is significantly better than Rookie Flacco, but Flacco certainly isn't struggling...I mean he's having the best year of any QB in his division. And I think you have to credit the offense around him for that.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;506208]Folks:

There is at least a 30% chance that the Eagles would trade Donovan McNabb at the end of this season.


SUPPOSE the Eagles offered an even-up trade:

McNabb for LaRon Landry.


Anyone here want to take that trade to get McNabb???[/quote]

Once again this isn't Madden. And even if it was this would be a horrible trade.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=GTripp0012;506276]Well, 4th year Campbell is significantly better than Rookie Flacco, but Flacco certainly isn't struggling...I mean he's having the best year of any QB in his division. And I think you have to credit the offense around him for that.[/quote]
The offense around him has been the nfl worst, since the inception of the Ravens.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

JC is simply not getting it done. He is not finding recievers and he is way to concervative with the ball. He simply can not sustain drives, and is inept in the red zone.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=T.O.Killa;506280]The offense around him has been the nfl worst, since the inception of the Ravens.[/quote]Right, but this isn't 2002. Clayton/Mason are a very competent WR duo, and the Ravens have a strong, retooled OL.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=GTripp0012;506284]Right, but this isn't 2002. Clayton/Mason are a very competent WR duo, and the Ravens have a strong, retooled OL.[/quote]


The Moss-Randle El duo were supposed to be just as lethal as those two are. I don't think a retooled OL alone is going to make JC a great QB and I do not want to wait for another 2-3 seasons for them to retool the OL only to find JC still is inadequate. Evaluate JC the rest of the way then the FO has to make a decision about him and they should open the QB position for competition in the preseason. Either the kid has it or he doesn't. Patrick Ramsey didn't get half the sympathy this kid gets.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;506302]The Moss-Randle El duo were supposed to be just as lethal as those two are. I don't think a retooled OL alone is going to make JC a great QB and I do not want to wait for another 2-3 seasons for them to retool the OL only to find JC still is inadequate. Evaluate JC the rest of the way then the FO has to make a decision about him and they should open the QB position for competition in the preseason. Either the kid has it or he doesn't. Patrick Ramsey didn't get half the sympathy this kid gets.[/quote]
I agree.