Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skinsfan69;598886][/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.[/quote]

People that think Collins would do a better job than Campbell right now are smoking something. For starters, Collins' mobility resembles that of an 80 year old woman, and our O-line leaks like an old faucet. Against a half decent pass rush, Collins may leave the field in an ambulance.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GMScud;598896]People that think Collins would do a better job than Campbell right now are smoking something. For starters, Collins' mobility resembles that of an 80 year old woman, and our O-line leaks like an old faucet. Against a half decent pass rush, Collins may leave the field in an ambulance.[/quote]

Agree 100%...so bring on Colt! :)

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]

Don't forget Reggie Bush, he has to be accounted for at all times, even though he hasn't had an overabundance of big plays.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=jsarno;598894]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.[/quote]Yes, you are mistaken. And not in spite of your refusal to go to the passing numbers.

The fumbles are a major issue. A MAJOR issue. And I'll credit you for going to that (a statistic) to defend your case. But without Campbell's passing efficiency, this team would have NO wins, and a good half of football from the defense against St. Louis away from being the worst team in football.

Campbell is more or less the difference between us and the Browns right now. And remember that I'm a pretty big Quinn fan.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skinsfan69;598886][/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.[/quote]

Thats an idiotic idea, is this really Jim Zorn? One of the only guys on the team, and a captain at that, having a decent season, and you wanna scrap him for a guy that will retire at seasons end. Thats not exactly the way to "rebuild" now is it? Campbell is doing a good job for the cards he has been dealt. Lets get a real offensive coordinator and see what Campbell can do with some real playcalls.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Collins would get the ball out quickly, but those 8-10 yard passes to Cooley that are a staple of our offense become 4-5 yard passes. And then we'd just be a top to bottom bad team.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;598883]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.[/quote]

I think you have to start up front. Problem is we never have enough draft picks to really begin an infusion of youth. I've always believed that a great offensive line will allow you to get RBs on the cheap. Timmy Smith, Terrell Davis, and Stephen Davis come to mind. Get some good blockers up front, now your QB has time and bargain running backs can find running lanes.

If you have to start somewhere, start at the O-line.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Blaming Campbell is such an easy cop out. The problem is much more complex. Campbell does well, but man our receivers and Zorn arent really helping him IMO.

Also we have said it quite a bit, but it starts top-down. We all knew the O was gonna be interesting this year based on our draft and pro-scouts.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Beemnseven;598902]I think you have to start up front. Problem is we never have enough draft picks to really begin an infusion of youth. I've always believed that a great offensive line will allow you to get RBs on the cheap. Timmy Smith, Terrell Davis, and Stephen Davis come to mind. Get some good blockers up front, now your QB has time and bargain running backs can find running lanes.

If you have to start somewhere, start at the O-line.[/quote]Alright. But Samuels and Dockery have been more than serviceable in their careers here, and I don't know what you'd call the right side of the line except a rebuilding project. So outside of using a high draft pick on the OL (whi ch you and I both favor), exactly who should go to make room for these players? Samuels is old, but does that mean we should part ways while he is still effective?

In a lot of ways, this is the first year of our OL rebuilding project. Randy Thomas is probably done as a Redskin, Casey Rabach is likely in his final season here, and we're trying to see if we have anything in Heyer or Rinehart. We could use a big, mean, proven college body, but I kind think we're already rebuilding on the OL.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

I truly applaud people who still manage to defend Campbell. I lost faith after last season and most likely won't regain it until he can maintain some consistency. People can argue all day long that Campbell is a good QB, but at the end of the day, he hasn't been good enough.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Here is another thing, Zorn really got away from the run early in the game. That shows lack of discipline, along with going for it on 4th and goal(which I feel was purely because of the media/fan pressure to get a TD).

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

if you cannot call a run on 3rd and one, you don't have a running game

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

50 % of the reason our offense sucks is zorns play calling
the other 50% is jason campbell

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;598912]50 % of the reason our offense sucks is zorns play calling
the other 50% is jason campbell[/quote]And 50% is that we don't have anyone else on the field apparently.

I know that equals 150%, but I guess that is what it takes to cover all your bases.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

I'll also go out on a limb here and say this.
Zorn gets fired and Mike shannanhan is our new HC. Campbell doesn't get resigned and goes to minnesota. We get a draft pick in the top ten. We do what ever we can to get sam bradford. Our OL next year will be. Donald Penn (of Tampa bay) at LT, Derrick Dockery LG, Draft pick at C (Mike Pouncey of Florida), Jahri Evans (of New Orleans) RG, Stephon Heyer at RT (or Samuels if we keep him). Our DL will be Orakpo at RE, Griffin, haynesworth, Jarmon at LE. Our LB's will be mcintosh, fletcher, and either a draft pick, or a FA. Our corners will be one of the crappy ones now, and a FA like dunta robinson. And I say that Shannahan asks for a new GM, and Vinny gets positioned down from GM, to like a smaller position.
I'm a very optimistic person, but I just see no way we win games with an offense that can't score in the red zone. Our defense is OK, they could be better if the offense stays on the field longer. I'm not as confident saying this, but I think LaRon could be trade bate for a high draft pick. And I forgot to mention that Greg Blache will either Resign or be fired.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

I think, a true rebuilding process would simply be: a decision on Hall, a decision on Landry, no more Smoot, a move away from Daniels and Wynn, releasing Randy Thomas outright, releasing Betts, a decision on Rabach, a franchise tag on Rogers, an RFA tender to Jason Campbell (assuming no CBA extension), a RFA tender to Rocky Mac, and I would trade up into the bottom of the second round AFTER using both of my first two picks and add some competition at the quarterback position.

If it's a true rebuilding project, I would not be afraid to start the rookie at QB if he beats out Jason Campebll.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;598912]50 % of the reason our offense sucks is zorns play calling
the other 50% is jason campbell[/quote]

This is an asinine statement. I guess our #1 RB being ineffective and our #2 getting tired quickly isn't an offensive problem? How about receivers dropping passes or their inability to separate?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Hog1;598911]if you cannot call a run on 3rd and one, you don't have a running game[/quote]

Exactly. I don't know why people keep talking about Zorn abandoned the running game. We don't have one. Period. We don't have the horses up front or in the backfield any longer. Portis isn't getting it done. The offensive isn't getting done.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=12thMan;598926]Exactly. I don't know why people keep talking about Zorn abandoned the running game. We don't have one. Period. We don't have the horses up front or in the backfield any longer. Portis isn't getting it done. The offensive isn't getting done.[/quote]

ZERO rushing yards in the 1st half.........enough said.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=BaltimoreSkins;598924]This is an asinine statement. I guess our #1 RB being ineffective and our #2 getting tired quickly isn't an offensive problem? How about receivers dropping passes or their inability to separate?[/quote]

Our strength is our running game, so when teams stack 8 in the box, that forces you to pass. The person who passes the ball...the QB!!
Sure the receivers have dropped a few, but a lot of campbells passes have been off target, and theres a reason Zorn doesn't have a lot of faith in campbell. And I agree betts should be cut, but really its the crappy play calling. And JC decision making has been awful. Example: 3 & 8, jason throws it to cooley on a short 5 yd route, and they come up 1 yd short. He doesn't throw to a receiver running downfield or towards the 1st down marker, he throws to a receiver running back to him. Just like when he was in the 2 min drill against detroit, he throws it to cartwright for a gain, then the clocks ticking, and what does he do? throws it to cartwright AGAIN in the middle of the field for a 2 yard gain. he should have thrown it towards the endzone or away. It's little things like that which make me say "He is not the answer" I've seen enough to say that year 2 in this offense is no different that year 1 in this offense. If campbell is struggling against detroit and st. louis, then how do you think he's going to do against philly, san diego, atlanta, carolina, new orleans, etc.?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;598944]Our strength is our running game, so when teams stack 8 in the box, that forces you to pass. The person who passes the ball...the QB!!
Sure the receivers have dropped a few, but a lot of campbells passes have been off target, and theres a reason Zorn doesn't have a lot of faith in campbell. And I agree betts should be cut, but really its the crappy play calling. And JC decision making has been awful. Example: 3 & 8, jason throws it to cooley on a short 5 yd route, and they come up 1 yd short. He doesn't throw to a receiver running downfield or towards the 1st down marker, he throws to a receiver running back to him. Just like when he was in the 2 min drill against detroit, he throws it to cartwright for a gain, then the clocks ticking, and what does he do? throws it to cartwright AGAIN in the middle of the field for a 2 yard gain. he should have thrown it towards the endzone or away. It's little things like that which make me say "He is not the answer" I've seen enough to say that year 2 in this offense is no different that year 1 in this offense. If campbell is struggling against detroit and st. louis, then how do you think he's going to do against philly, san diego, atlanta, carolina, new orleans, etc.?[/quote]But it's not like anyone is playing a lot of 8 in the box against us. When the safety comes up, we could check out of the running plays we do call, but then we are talking about Portis averaging 5 carries a game. He wouldn't accept that.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;598906]Alright. But Samuels and Dockery have been more than serviceable in their careers here, and I don't know what you'd call the right side of the line except a rebuilding project. So outside of using a high draft pick on the OL (whi ch you and I both favor), exactly who should go to make room for these players? Samuels is old, but does that mean we should part ways while he is still effective?

In a lot of ways, this is the first year of our OL rebuilding project. Randy Thomas is probably done as a Redskin, Casey Rabach is likely in his final season here, and we're trying to see if we have anything in Heyer or Rinehart. We could use a big, mean, proven college body, but I kind think we're already rebuilding on the OL.[/quote]

No, certainly you don't take Samuels out with the garbage. Dockery stays too. But left tackle has to be in the plans somewhere down the line. I agree -- right guard and right tackle are already up in the air. It sure would be nice if Rinehart steps right in and becomes a fixture. Can't jettison him until we know what we've got. As far as who goes, you'd hope that whoever they draft will easily replace any of our current backups who weren't able to break into a starting position this year.

It's also important to point out that drafting linemen shouldn't just be a one or two-year action plan. You have to layer your picks, and find a way to take two or three every other draft or so no matter what.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Beemnseven;598957]No, certainly you don't take Samuels out with the garbage. Dockery stays too. But left tackle has to be in the plans somewhere down the line. I agree -- right guard and right tackle are already up in the air. It sure would be nice if Rinehart steps right in and becomes a fixture. Can't jettison him until we know what we've got. As far as who goes, you'd hope that whoever they draft will easily replace any of our current backups who weren't able to break into a starting position this year.

[B]It's also important to point out that drafting linemen shouldn't just be a one or two-year action plan. You have to layer your picks, and find a way to take two or three every other draft or so no matter what.[/B][/quote]We agree on the bolded part. A long term commitment to the OL is in order.

If the OL gets it figured out before the end of the year though, I'm not sure we should use one of our first two picks on an offensive line player. This is different from suggesting we shouldn't add any lineman in the draft.

I think our biggest single offensive need is RB, and I would not pass up a chance to use one of the top two picks in the draft next year on a RB. Then we have to decide whether the other one should be used on the offensive line, or the defensive back seven. And you have to admit, the defensive back seven is making a pretty darn strong case for itself.

Either way, I'm picking up at least two lineman in the draft if I'm in charge of the Skins.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Fellows we are only 1 yard and a couple of inches from being 2-1. This is not the time to panick....relax, we going to win the next 4 in a row, and then everyone will be saying, I TOLD YOU SO!

Zorn is the Man, Jason, I knew he had it in him, the D-fence has jelled!

We need faith and a few Miracles!!!

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;598944]Our strength is our running game, so when teams stack 8 in the box, that forces you to pass.[/quote]

This was the case last year......not this year. We are a better passing team now, we cant run the ball with this O-line. Everyone knows that we are going left, its not gonna get better anytime soon either.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=hooskins;598905][B]Blaming Campbell is such an easy cop out. The problem is much more complex.[/B] Campbell does well, but man our receivers and Zorn arent really helping him IMO.

Also we have said it quite a bit, but it starts top-down. We all knew the O was gonna be interesting this year based on our draft and pro-scouts.[/quote]

No doubt. It's a narrow minded view, but you can't expect everyone to get it I guess. The easy thing to do is just blame the QB. It's something Redskins fans are pretty good at.

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]

For one thing I have yet to see any post Lion defeat thread have anyone say bench JC, except the one here. Next is that stats don't lie, but we still can't get into the endzone, which is not JC's fault. I was at the game Sunday with some of my friends who are Lions fans. My best friend who is an avid Lion and football fan in general told me that we needed a new QB. I told him to look at the scoreboard stats, it didn't matter to him. You know what, he had a point. Stafford is a rook and showed more poise than JC an guy that has been around for 6 years. What did JC have, 3 or 4 dropped snaps that could have ended up as fumbles? The one he recovered rather nicely, but why did he lose the snaps in the first place? Other times he was like a deer in headlights not sure whether to throw or run or who to throw to. The other intangible is the leadership aspect of being 'the man", and JC is woefully inadequate in this aspect of his role as starter. Shit Gus showed more emotion and tried to rally the team more back during the Norv days than JC has now. Zorn's scheme is the basic problem, but JC, along with a lot of the squad deserves a lot of heat from Sunday's game. THey showed absolutely no fire at all, either sides of the ball. Oh and props to good ole Gus, for he truly did more with less!!!!!

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Mattyk72;598968]The easy thing to do is just blame the QB. It's something Redskins fans are pretty good at.[/quote]

I dont think its just Redskins fans, its football fans in general. The QB position is the most critical position on the field, and those that play it MUST have thick skin. First one to blame for a loss, first one to praise for a win, it just comes along with the job.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;598975]For one thing I have yet to see any post Lion defeat thread have anyone say bench JC, except the one here. Next is that stats don't lie, but we still can't get into the endzone, which is not JC's fault. I was at the game Sunday with some of my friends who are Lions fans. My best friend who is an avid Lion and football fan in general told me that we needed a new QB. I told him to look at the scoreboard stats, it didn't matter to him. You know what, he is right. Stafford is a rook and showed more poise than JC an guy that has been around for 6 years. What did JC have, 3 or 4 dropped snaps that could have ended up as fumbles? The one he recovered rather nicely, but why did he lose the snaps in the first place? Other times he was like a deer in headlights not sure whether to throw or run or who to throw to. The other intangible is the leadership aspect of being 'the man", and JC is woefully inadequate in this aspect of his role as starter. Shit Gus showed more emotion and tried to rally the team more back during the Norv days than JC has now. Zorn's scheme is the basic problem, but JC, along with a lot of the squad deserves a lot of heat from Sunday's game. THey showed absolutely no fire at all, either sides of the ball. Oh and props to good ole Gus, for he truly did more with less!!!!![/quote]

You crack me up with the Gus mentions. We're talking about a guy who head-butted a cement wall for crying out loud.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

God I miss the early Norv days. I think I am going to get a Frerotte jersey now!!!!!

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;598975]For one thing I have yet to see any post Lion defeat thread have anyone say bench JC, except the one here. Next is that stats don't lie, but we still can't get into the endzone, which is not JC's fault. I was at the game Sunday with some of my friends who are Lions fans. My best friend who is an avid Lion and football fan in general told me that we needed a new QB. I told him to look at the scoreboard stats, it didn't matter to him. You know what, he is right. Stafford is a rook and showed more poise than JC an guy that has been around for 6 years. What did JC have, 3 or 4 dropped snaps that could have ended up as fumbles? The one he recovered rather nicely, but why did he lose the snaps in the first place? Other times he was like a deer in headlights not sure whether to throw or run or who to throw to. The other intangible is the leadership aspect of being 'the man", and JC is woefully inadequate in this aspect of his role as starter. Shit Gus showed more emotion and tried to rally the team more back during the Norv days than JC has now. Zorn's scheme is the basic problem, but JC, along with a lot of the squad deserves a lot of heat from Sunday's game. THey showed absolutely no fire at all, either sides of the ball. Oh and props to good ole Gus, for he truly did more with less!!!!![/quote]I like the part where you totally outsmarted your friend, and then for no reason concluded that he was right.

Maybe there's something intangible that Campbell is missing that contributes to the offensive disorganization. But it never looks like the game is too fast for him out there, if anything, it looks like he wants to get out there and run plays faster than Zorn can get them in. I put the disorganization on Zorn, not Campbell lacking in intangibles.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Mattyk72;598980]You crack me up with the Gus mentions. We're talking about a guy who head-butted a cement wall for crying out loud.[/quote]


True, but at least he had heart!!!!! And unless JC gets the TD machine going Gus will still be over JC in passing TDs as a Skin at year's end!!!!!!!!! Also, did Gus have the weapons like JC does now?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;598982]I like the part where you totally outsmarted your friend, and then for no reason concluded that he was right.

Maybe there's something intangible that Campbell is missing that contributes to the offensive disorganization. But it never looks like the game is too fast for him out there, if anything, it looks like he wants to get out there and run plays faster than Zorn can get them in. I put the disorganization on Zorn, not Campbell lacking in intangibles.[/quote]

I switched that part to he had a point. Besides he did have a valid point. JC is indecisive and shows no fire in being the leader of the offense. Stafford looked more relaxed/poised than JC. That was all too painfully obvious!!! JC is the man, but really hasn't grown into the part yet.

[FONT=Arial Black][SIZE=6]Gus Frerotte Rules!!!![/SIZE][/FONT]

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;598985]True, but at least he had heart!!!!! And unless JC gets the TD machine going Gus will still be over JC in passing TDs as a Skin at year's end!!!!!!!!! Also, did Gus have the weapons like JC does now?[/quote]He didn't have a Cooley comparable, but then again, Campbell's numbers are just better. So Cooley might help to explain that.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;598985]True, but at least he had heart!!!!! And unless JC gets the TD machine going Gus will still be over JC in passing TDs as a Skin at year's end!!!!!!!!! Also, did Gus have the weapons like JC does now?[/quote]

Yeah you got me, tried looking up some heart stats and Gus clearly wins. As for weapons didn't Gus have the likes of Henry Ellard?

And I wouldn't brag too hard on his numbers... they were less than impressive. In fact they were pretty mediocre.

[URL="http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/FrerGu00.htm"]Gus Frerotte NFL & AFL Football Statistics | Pro-Football-Reference.com[/URL]

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Mattyk72;598990]Yeah you got me, tried looking up some heart stats and Gus clearly wins. As for weapons didn't Gus have the likes of Henry Ellard?

And I wouldn't brag too hard on his numbers... they were less than impressive.

[URL="http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/FrerGu00.htm"]Gus Frerotte NFL & AFL Football Statistics | Pro-Football-Reference.com[/URL][/quote]


Ellard was on the downslope of his career at that point, so was Leslie Shepard. He also didn't have a Cooley to save his ass either.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

campbell is mark brunell jr. he is a happy looser.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;598992]Ellard was on the downslope of his career at that point, so was Leslie Sheppard. He also didn't have a Cooley to save his ass either.[/quote]

Ellard topped 1,000 yards in 3 of his 4 seasons in WAS.

He was still pretty damn good

[URL="http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/E/EllaHe00.htm"]Henry Ellard NFL & AFL Football Statistics | Pro-Football-Reference.com[/URL]

As for TE Jamie Asher was a pretty reliable target

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;598987]I switched that part to he had a point. Besides he did have a valid point. JC is indecisive and shows no fire in being the leader of the offense. Stafford looked more relaxed/poised than JC. That was all too painfully obvious!!! JC is the man, but really hasn't grown into the part yet.

[FONT=Arial Black][SIZE=6]Gus Frerotte Sucks!!!![/SIZE][/FONT][/quote]

See this is the reason why Jason Campbell needs to go to another team, you got the f'ing owner wanting to ship him out town and stupid fans that are making up reasons to hate him and lay the blame solely on him.

As I said, I wish Campbell was a terrible QB so these morons had something to complain about.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Gus had Brian Mitchell