Re: Good for Campbell
 

No but how is it the truth if he says it but if Portis said it then he would be throwing them under the bus. So why would Jason be any different ? I could care less now, he's an Oakland fans' problem now. Someone questioned me on something that I said and I pulled that. However, I'm a well documented Jason Campbell hater so,...

Re: Good for Campbell
 

I think it was different with Portis last season because Portis talked so much trash, and then didnt do anything in the games to back it up, and he alienated himself from his teammates by not working out or practicing with them.

But thats in the past, and he seems to be a good solider this year. Plus also, his job is in jeopardy for the first time in his redskins career.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

I find the throwing under the bus shtick the sport version of political correctness and find it rather annoying. When players play poorly, the facts speak for themselves, and no amount of BS self-censorship due to some camaraderie is going to change the facts. So by extension, I really don't have a problem with either of them calling them out when the line is [I]actually[/I] playing like crap.
Now, I think people were ticked off at CP because even if he was right, he was a hypocrite because he himself didn't put 100% effort into his work either.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=BaltimoreSkins;719825]Not to sound ignorant, but it sounds like you're upset with Campbell for speaking the truth.[/quote]

TO be fair - what JC (and Collins) had to work with:


[url=http://www.nfl.com/videos/washington-redskins/09000d5d80c3666d/Steelers-Defense-Highlight-WK-09-vs-Redskins-2008]NFL Videos: Steelers Defense Highlight, WK 09 vs. Redskins 2008[/url]

[url=http://www.nfl.com/videos/washington-redskins/09000d5d80c3663c/Steelers-Defense-Highlight-WK-09-vs-Redskins-2008]NFL Videos: Steelers Defense Highlight, WK 09 vs. Redskins 2008[/url]

[url=http://www.nfl.com/videos/washington-redskins/09000d5d8137eb9a/Chiefs-safety]NFL Videos: Chiefs safety[/url]

[YT]L61gXw1Nv6o[/YT]

[YT]BhebbrjaAX0[/YT]

[YT]eGAyOofRohY[/YT]

[url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsbog/2009/11/campbell_says_everything_black.html]D.C. Sports Bog - Campbell says everything "blacked out"[/url]

Re: Good for Campbell
 

Ok. I am not a hater of JC, but I am critical of his faults and I think Jason is about a middle of the road guy who needs a GREAT OLINE AND GOOD SKILL players to win. If there are any cracks in the line then he is a bottom tier QB. He does not have the skill of getting rid of the ball quickly down.

I think the Raiders are not going to see anything different than we did in JC. He is going to be the same QB with all of the same faults and Raiders fans will be giving him alot of the same criticims we did as fans.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;719850]I find the throwing under the bus shtick the sport version of political correctness and find it rather annoying. When players play poorly, the facts speak for themselves, and no amount of BS self-censorship due to some camaraderie is going to change the facts. So by extension, I really don't have a problem with either of them calling them out when the line is [I]actually[/I] playing like crap.
Now, I think people were ticked off at CP because even if he was right, he was a hypocrite because he himself didn't put 100% effort into his work either.[/quote]A good point, and very well stated.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=artmonkforhallofamein07;719858]Ok. I am not a hater of JC, but I am critical of his faults and I think Jason is about a middle of the road guy who needs a GREAT OLINE AND GOOD SKILL players to win. If there are any cracks in the line then he is a bottom tier QB. He does not have the skill of getting rid of the ball quickly down.

I think the Raiders are not going to see anything different than we did in JC. He is going to be the same QB with all of the same faults and Raiders fans will be giving him alot of the same criticims we did as fans.[/quote]I don't necessarily disagree with your conclusion here, but there's a middle ground between great OL and good skill players, and what the Redskins had last season. Some examples include the Cleveland OL, Philly's OL, Detroit's OL, Tampa's OL, and Houston's OL. With any of those units (and the same, underachieving receivers), I would have to think our offense last year is an 8 to 10 win offense.

This year, I think our OL will be in that discussion, and that our offense will be improved by about that much.

Of course, saying that Campbell is a "bottom tier" quarterback when there's cracks in the line ignores the fact that Campbell's never been a bottom tier QB -- and theres been plenty of cracks in the line. That's a pretty clear denial of reality.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

Yeah I think it's safe to say the bottom fell out last year, and he still put up middle of the road numbers in a bad system.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

Give me some time to type my retort

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=MonkFan4Life;719875]Give me some time to type my retort[/quote]You can have all the time in the world, but if you're not going to have any substance, don't bother to respond just to respond.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=MonkFan4Life;719875]Give me some time to type my retort[/quote]

Look up the thread where I tracked JC, Sanchez and Cutler's stats first. :D

Re: Good for Campbell
 

Dude honestly? I give examples all day but you all just say no he didn't and the o line was bad and you all are geniuses. It truly is pointless. His play will do all the talking but you all will find an excuse for that as well. He is as indecisive a QB as I have seen in a long time. Take away last year, which is bad for you all because you take away his best year TD wise. But what do you have left ?

I can't use the '07 season as an example because you all will say that it doesn't count because Todd Collins who had to play behind the same O-Line and use the same receivers that couldn't play well and led this team to the playoffs when we were running away from playoff contention. Why ? Because you all will say that it was just because Todd Collins was in Al Saunders' system forever. Cool. Even though we had to defeat the Vikings, Giants, Cowboys, and Bears all four teams had pretty damn good defenses that year but it wouldn't fly though would it ?

I can't use his first year with Zorn because you all will just say that he was good early in the year and that Ron Jaworski said that Campbell played well. But you will forget how Jaworski ripped JC and his followers about JC not having time. But you all would've probably missed that game.

For some reason I am the only guy here who saw JC miss recievers time and time again on deep routes. Whether it was a deep post, a deep out, a fly, or even a fade that he threw put of bounds consistently buuuut I'm sure that would be the receivers fault.

Or how about the line adjustments that he wouldn't quite do ? I mean lets be real people. You all talked about how he wasn't allowed to audible because he was being held back by the administration but he told Matt Mosley that he checked from a pass to a run on a 3 and 8 against the Giants because he forgot the down and distance.

You can look back at the games and see where he misses receivers or waits too long to pull the trigger. When has he wowed you as a fan ? When did you ever look at him and say damn he's good ? I'm sure that you probably left many games saying If he only, or He was that close. Hold on to that New Orleans game because that was the only time that he showed a glimmer of brilliance in my opinion. You tell me when he pointed out a blitz, or when he made you feel like he was special. But what the hell do I know ?

I'm sure some of you play Madden and if you can figure out that sometimes you need to change a protection to survive,.. Why can't he ?

Have your fun loving him and his subpar play. Like I've always said, UNTIL he changes his game he will be what he is. Middle of the pack and apparently we as Redskins fans believe that middle of the pack can work because waaaaaaaaay back in the day we were able to win without the best QB's in the league. The man NEVER had to compete for his job, and only when he was told that he would be replaced did he decide to start becoming a leader on this team. So GTripp maybe this isn't good enough but you all kill me with the way that you all defend him.. You can be so critical of everyone elses play but this guy,...this guy gets a pass. But why ?

He's a Raider and I'm officially done talking about him here. I'll save it for another area where I can talk and see the look in someones eyes when they realize that ot's not just hate, but the fact that I'm a fan of this team who wasn't willing to settle for subpar play at the most important position in all of sports.

Jason Campbell is a bum and I'm done talking about him.

Have fun with this.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=Buster;719883]Look up the thread where I tracked JC, Sanchez and Cutler's stats first. :D[/quote]

No need homie, I don't care about them. I wanted my QB to better. I have a new one now so Good for Campbell he's in Oakland with a better team. I just hope that he makes it to the end of the season as their starter.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

I too often wonder what will happen to Jason's NFL Career should he be benched in Oakland.

For some reason, i dont see him staying on as a backup QB in the league.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=SolidSnake84;719893]I too often wonder what will happen to Jason's NFL Career should he be benched in Oakland.

For some reason, i dont see him staying on as a backup QB in the league.[/quote]

He'll probably cry until he get's a job somewhere. I'll be done after this one. When Larry Johnson and Willie Parker were brought in did anyone care about Portis' feelings ? A man who only when he was injured didn't put up any less than 1,262 yards a season. No, we only said he deserves it. He needs to be replaced. He showed up to camp, didn't miss a workout, didn't bitch to the media,... Nothing.

We trade for Donovan and what does Jason do ? Does he buckle his straps tie up his boots and go to war ? NO, he tucks tail and runs for the microphone for teh pity party. Doesn't show up to camp, nothing. Stays away until he gets traded. I guess that was because he didn't want there to be a QB controversy huh ?

He saw that he could and would be replaced but the beautiful thing is that it wasn't Dan Snyder who did it. It was Mike and Kyle Shanahan along with Bruce Allen who decided that he wasn't good enough. Like my good friend says,... the tape doesn't lie !

NOW, I'm done.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=MonkFan4Life;719891]Dude honestly? I give examples all day but you all just say no he didn't and the o line was bad and you all are geniuses. It truly is pointless. His play will do all the talking but you all will find an excuse for that as well. He is as indecisive a QB as I have seen in a long time. Take away last year, which is bad for you all because you take away his best year TD wise. But what do you have left ?

I can't use the '07 season as an example because you all will say that it doesn't count because Todd Collins who had to play behind the same O-Line and use the same receivers that couldn't play well and led this team to the playoffs when we were running away from playoff contention. Why ? Because you all will say that it was just because Todd Collins was in Al Saunders' system forever. Cool. Even though we had to defeat the Vikings, Giants, Cowboys, and Bears all four teams had pretty damn good defenses that year but it wouldn't fly though would it ?

I can't use his first year with Zorn because you all will just say that he was good early in the year and that Ron Jaworski said that Campbell played well. But you will forget how Jaworski ripped JC and his fololowers about JC not having time. But you all would've probably missed that game.

For some reason I am the only guy here who saw JC miss recievers time and time again on deep routes. Whether it was a deep post, a deep out, a fly, or even a fade that he threw put pf bounds consistently buuuut I'm sure that would be the receivers fault.

Or how about the line adjustments that he wouldn't quite do ? I mean lets be real people. You all talked about how he wasn't allowed to audible because he was being held back by the administration but he told Matt Mosley that he checked from a pass to a run on a 3 and 8 against the Giants because he forgot the down and distance.

You can look back at the games and see where he misses receivers or waits too long to pull the trigger. When has he wowed you as a fan ? When did you ever look at him and say damn he's good ? I'm sure that you probably left many games saying If he only, or He was that close. Hold on to that New Orleans game because that was the only time that he showed a glimmer of brilliance in my opinion. You tell me when he pointed out a blitz, or when he made you feel like he was special. But what the hell do I know ?

I'm sure some of you play Madden and if you can figure out that sometimes you need to change a protection to survive,.. Why can't he ?

Have your fun loving him and his subpar play. Like I've always said, UNTIL he changes his game he will be what he is. Middle of the pack and apparently we as Redskins fans believe that middle of the pack can work because waaaaaaaaay back in the day we were able to win without the best QB's in the league. The man NEVER had to compete for his job, and only when he was told that he would be replaced did he decide to start becoming a leader on this team. So GTripp maybe this isn't good enough but you all kill me with the way that you all defend him.. You can be so critical of everyone elses play but this guy,...this guy gets a pass. But why ?

He's a Raider and I'm officially done talking about him here. I'll save it for another area where I can talk and see the look in someones eyes when they realize that ot's not just hate, but the fact that I'm a fan of this team who wasn't willing to settle for subpar play at the most important position in all of sports.

Jason Campbell is a bum and I'm done talking about him.

Have fun with this.[/quote]I agree with you that pre-taking a stance on Jason Campbell and trying to fit the evidence to your position is pointless, but that's about all we agree on.

When you (or anyone) take four Todd Collins starts from 2007 and tries to make a conclusive statement from a couple of good games (and a not-great playoff game), it's hard to take such an apples to oranges comparison seriously. If, and only if, the idea is to suggest that Collins would won more games in the 2007 season than Jason Campbell given a whole season, the position is defensible, but still weak. You probably want more than two well played games to make a claim stronger than just a man's opinion. But, I really don't think that your claim is, "Jason Campbell wasn't our best QB in 2007." I think you are trying to take evidence from 2007, and make a definitive comment about Campbell as a player

But you can't take that comparison any further, as things were different when Gibbs left. Collins didn't play at all in 2008, and when he played in 2009 (particularly the KC game), he was poor. I will never knock Todd Collins' approach to the game, as he always came off the bench ready to make a difference (at least until his first hit), but if anything, 2009 proves 2007 to be at least something of a fluke.

More to the point, you ignore that Gibbs, Saunders, and Zorn all call their protection in their plays. Your boy Collins never changed the protection at the line either. A lot of NFL offenses do rely on the quarterbacks to set their protections, which I imagine is something we'll see tonight from Shanahan/McNabb. But the fact that it hasn't ever been part of the offense in Washington isn't a discredit to the quarterback's aptitude, but a preference of the offensive coach.

There's film evidence of Campbell misreading the coverage, missing open receivers, and not giving plays a chance to develop. There's just as much, if not more, film evidence of him doing a good job in the presnap phase, making fast reads, getting to third and fourth receivers, and making great throw under pressure (he's a top ten quarterback, statistically, under pressure).

I don't expect you to understand and be able to analyze QB play, but it'd be nice if you wouldn't appeal to your own ability to do so, which is unquestionably lacking.

Your "me against the world" routine is overtly feminine and tiresome. You're not the only person who posts here who thought Jason Campbell left a lot to be desired as a pro quarterback. You may be the only one who thinks that their own opinion is important enough that everyone else must be lacking your attention to detail to arrive at the same conclusion you were able to, but that doesn't mean there aren't people who agree with you. There are also numerous people who disagree with you and provide much stronger evidence to support their claims, which makes you respond with something usually classless and absent of reasoning.

Your continued obsession with Campbell, even as you state that he's not "your" problem anymore (as if he ever was), adds very little to this forum.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=Buster;719883]Look up the thread where I tracked JC, Sanchez and Cutler's stats first. :D[/quote]

Here's something for you Buster.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTqk4Du4-wM]YouTube - Charlie Casserly Says Jason Campbell Is "Too Indecisive"[/ame]


F numbers, the tape don't lie.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

i think charlie hits the nail on the head imo. JC was too hesitant and didnt trust what he saw.

i was wathcing some of the raiders TC, JC and the receivers were just doing some route running and light throwing (no O or D line or defenders etc). a receiver ran a 10 yard out route, JC hesitated on that and double pumped it. i lol. ohh that JC.

oh well, hes a raider now, we can move on.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

GTripp you say that Zorn calls protections in the plays right ? Go to Redskins.com and look up the post game press conference from 9-14-08 when we beat New Orleans. Listen to what Jim Zorn says about what Jason did and what they are working with him on. Secondly in that KC game Todd Collins got a delay of game because he was changing the protection. He made line adjustments. I feel that my opinion is good enough but I'm so persistent with my views because you all are so persistent in tellung me that I'm wrong for what I see. I don't get how you and so many other skins fans revere this guy. Let me stop with my overtly feminine and tiresome me against the world routine.

Be easy.

I appreciate how you can type up a nice post and be very eloquent with your delivery but it still doesn't prove a thing. If you have your own opinion of how things went you do. I see something different. Like I said his play has and will do the talking. It has said enough for me to say that he's sorry but you all see a star.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=MonkFan4Life;719896]When Larry Johnson and Willie Parker were brought in did anyone care about Portis' feelings ? A man who only when he was injured didn't put up any less than 1,262 yards a season. No, we only said he deserves it. He needs to be replaced. H[B]e showed up to camp, didn't miss a workout, didn't bitch to the media,... Nothing.[/B]
[/quote]


Is this a joke? Or are you being serious? I could be misreading your post, but if your talking about Portis from last season, he was one of the team's biggest headaches. And he did bitch to the media. He didn't work out at all. Nor did he practice with the team. The year before, he told Jim Zorn to "Get the F**k out of my face". (received extensive news coverage). He even said that had Jim Zorn stayed, he would have quit football. It was only sadly when the man got knocked out for the year, that the running game picked up and the team could finally move on beyond his distractions.


I give mad props to Portis for supposedly shaping up this season, but i dont think anybody can say that he was not a major problem during the latter part of 2008 and most of 2009. And I dont dislike Portis, i just think he is another guy who was caught up in the T.O. mold for a while.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=MonkFan4Life;719903] Secondly in that KC game Todd Collins got a delay of game because he was changing the protection. He made line adjustments. [/quote]

i commented on the exact same thing after that game as well. the very first snap when collins came in he made an adjustment. now that play ended up being a false start or delay of game but the next play, same formation was a bomb to moss.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=MonkFan4Life;719903]GTripp you say that Zorn calls protections in the plays right ? Go to Redskins.com and look up the post game press conference from 9-14-08 when we beat New Orleans. Listen to what Jim Zorn says about what Jason did and what they are working with him on. Secondly in that KC game Todd Collins got a delay of game because he was changing the protection. He made line adjustments. I feel that my opinion is good enough but I'm so persistent with my views because you all are so persistent in tellung me that I'm wrong for what I see. I don't get how you and so many other skins fans revere this guy. Let me stop with my overtly feminine and tiresome me against the world routine.

Be easy.

I appreciate how you can type up a nice post and be very eloquent with your delivery but it still doesn't prove a thing. If you have your own opinion of how things went you do. I see something different. Like I said his play has and will do the talking. It has said enough for me to say that he's sorry but you all see a star.[/quote]I don't think Collins was changing the [I]protection[/I] on the play you reference, but obviously, the play clock is a limiting factor on how much you can tweak a play. Either way, tweaking the protection and setting it are two different things.

My point is you are not alone in your opinion. Other people see what you do. I have seen what you are referencing. I also see every other play, and make note of the negative, but do not dwell on it. I don't dwell on the positive either. There are many plays in a fb season. Campbell had almost 550 plays last year. He missed a wide open receiver maybe 8-9 times. He might have passed on a tough but makable throw two or three times as often.

If of 550 plays in the season, there are 180 bad plays made by the quarterback (sacks, avoidable incompletions, interceptions), and 20-30 of them are because the quarterback got confused and missed his read or held the ball too long, and cost the team some points and perhaps half a win to a win, well, there's room for improvement. But by NFL standards, there's not a problem.

We see the same film evidence. I might see it a few times more than most, but it's not a matter of differences in evidence. It's about understanding what a bad QB play is in NFL, and the best QBs in the NFL make 5-6 really bad QB plays in a single season.

***

If we used logic consistent with the anti-Campbell arguments, the Saints should at least think about finding someone better than Drew Brees. Because he makes more than a few bad plays in any season, and if quarterbacks make bad plays, we have to hold them accountable. Drew Brees should be held accountable for his mistakes, and, thusly, the Saints should have been more aggressive in trying to acquire Donovan McNabb.

A good analyst focuses on the 150 plays that went bad with Campbell doing his job at least respectably. Doesn't make the other 30 excusable mistakes, but if you fix 8 mistakes by changing the QB to someone better, and now have 170 bad passing plays in a season, well, what have you really done?

Re: Good for Campbell
 

The other problem is that you're creating a strawman that we all see a "star". I think, if his development had gone perfectly (and I think it's gone disasterously), Campbell could have been a multi-time pro-bowler.

But you wouldn't have expected to go perfectly (Tom Brady's development, I'd describe as perfect. Philip Rivers, ditto), as there's many uncontrollable variables in a QBs development. I don't think there was a high probability, coming out of Auburn, that Campbell was going to be a star, here or elsewhere. With that said, we've probably ruined him, to a degree, but he didn't exactly remind anyone of Sonny Jurgensen in his first camp.

I don't think you'll find anyone who "sees a star." Not one fan. Redskins or Raiders.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

Why are we still arguing about JC? The guy isn't any good or here anymore. Oakland is bad and he can't make them better.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

Nobody reveres him or thinks he's a star. He's a middle of the road QB. He's no Manning or Brady, but he's certainly not garbage or a bum. This is just beyond silly now.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=MonkFan4Life;719891]Dude honestly? I give examples all day but you all just say no he didn't and the o line was bad and you all are geniuses. It truly is pointless. His play will do all the talking but you all will find an excuse for that as well. He is as indecisive a QB as I have seen in a long time. Take away last year, which is bad for you all because you take away his best year TD wise. But what do you have left ?

I can't use the '07 season as an example because you all will say that it doesn't count because Todd Collins who had to play behind the same O-Line and use the same receivers that couldn't play well and led this team to the playoffs when we were running away from playoff contention. Why ? Because you all will say that it was just because Todd Collins was in Al Saunders' system forever. Cool. Even though we had to defeat the Vikings, Giants, Cowboys, and Bears all four teams had pretty damn good defenses that year but it wouldn't fly though would it ?

I can't use his first year with Zorn because you all will just say that he was good early in the year and that Ron Jaworski said that Campbell played well. But you will forget how Jaworski ripped JC and his followers about JC not having time. But you all would've probably missed that game.

For some reason I am the only guy here who saw JC miss recievers time and time again on deep routes. Whether it was a deep post, a deep out, a fly, or even a fade that he threw put of bounds consistently buuuut I'm sure that would be the receivers fault.

Or how about the line adjustments that he wouldn't quite do ? I mean lets be real people. You all talked about how he wasn't allowed to audible because he was being held back by the administration but he told Matt Mosley that he checked from a pass to a run on a 3 and 8 against the Giants because he forgot the down and distance.

You can look back at the games and see where he misses receivers or waits too long to pull the trigger. When has he wowed you as a fan ? When did you ever look at him and say damn he's good ? I'm sure that you probably left many games saying If he only, or He was that close. Hold on to that New Orleans game because that was the only time that he showed a glimmer of brilliance in my opinion. You tell me when he pointed out a blitz, or when he made you feel like he was special. But what the hell do I know ?

I'm sure some of you play Madden and if you can figure out that sometimes you need to change a protection to survive,.. Why can't he ?

Have your fun loving him and his subpar play. Like I've always said, UNTIL he changes his game he will be what he is. Middle of the pack and apparently we as Redskins fans believe that middle of the pack can work because waaaaaaaaay back in the day we were able to win without the best QB's in the league. The man NEVER had to compete for his job, and only when he was told that he would be replaced did he decide to start becoming a leader on this team. So GTripp maybe this isn't good enough but you all kill me with the way that you all defend him.. You can be so critical of everyone elses play but this guy,...this guy gets a pass. But why ?

He's a Raider and I'm officially done talking about him here. I'll save it for another area where I can talk and see the look in someones eyes when they realize that ot's not just hate, but the fact that I'm a fan of this team who wasn't willing to settle for subpar play at the most important position in all of sports.

Jason Campbell is a bum and I'm done talking about him.

Have fun with this.[/quote]

Here you go buddy, you are not the only one. Quote: Originally Posted by Audi View Post Is this a further indictment on Jason Campbell's value around the league? So far we have the Panthers preferring to stick with Matt Moore, the Cleveland Browns going with Seneca Wallace and Jake Delhomme, the Broncos preferring first Kyle Orton and now Brady Quinn, and of course the Bears preferring Jay Cutler. Yes, he is a career journeyman, who has not raised his game even to the level of other career journeyman such as Kerry Collins, Jeff Garcia, Jon Kitna, etc. In other words he is a BUM.. Yes I said it: a BUM, but he happens to be the best option we currently have at QB. So we make do and give the bum another chance to disappoint us again before we absolutely throw him to the wolves by the end of the season... [URL]http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/35666-report-quinn-traded-to-broncos-2.html#post673711[/URL] I think there are plenty of others that feel this way about JC but are tired of rehashing this with you since he is now a Raidah. Out with the old, in with the NEW!! HTTR!!!!

Re: Good for Campbell
 

I think he needs to be with another team or two to technically be considered a journeyman.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=MonkFan4Life;719891]Dude honestly? I give examples all day but you all just say no he didn't and the o line was bad and you all are geniuses. It truly is pointless. His play will do all the talking but you all will find an excuse for that as well. He is as indecisive a QB as I have seen in a long time. Take away last year, which is bad for you all because you take away his best year TD wise. But what do you have left ?

I can't use the '07 season as an example because you all will say that it doesn't count because Todd Collins who had to play behind the same O-Line and use the same receivers that couldn't play well and led this team to the playoffs when we were running away from playoff contention. Why ? Because you all will say that it was just because Todd Collins was in Al Saunders' system forever. Cool. Even though we had to defeat the Vikings, Giants, Cowboys, and Bears all four teams had pretty damn good defenses that year but it wouldn't fly though would it ?

I can't use his first year with Zorn because you all will just say that he was good early in the year and that Ron Jaworski said that Campbell played well. But you will forget how Jaworski ripped JC and his followers about JC not having time. But you all would've probably missed that game.

For some reason I am the only guy here who saw JC miss recievers time and time again on deep routes. Whether it was a deep post, a deep out, a fly, or even a fade that he threw put of bounds consistently buuuut I'm sure that would be the receivers fault.

Or how about the line adjustments that he wouldn't quite do ? I mean lets be real people. You all talked about how he wasn't allowed to audible because he was being held back by the administration but he told Matt Mosley that he checked from a pass to a run on a 3 and 8 against the Giants because he forgot the down and distance.

You can look back at the games and see where he misses receivers or waits too long to pull the trigger. When has he wowed you as a fan ? When did you ever look at him and say damn he's good ? I'm sure that you probably left many games saying If he only, or He was that close. Hold on to that New Orleans game because that was the only time that he showed a glimmer of brilliance in my opinion. You tell me when he pointed out a blitz, or when he made you feel like he was special. But what the hell do I know ?

I'm sure some of you play Madden and if you can figure out that sometimes you need to change a protection to survive,.. Why can't he ?

Have your fun loving him and his subpar play. Like I've always said, UNTIL he changes his game he will be what he is. Middle of the pack and apparently we as Redskins fans believe that middle of the pack can work because waaaaaaaaay back in the day we were able to win without the best QB's in the league. The man NEVER had to compete for his job, and only when he was told that he would be replaced did he decide to start becoming a leader on this team. So GTripp maybe this isn't good enough but you all kill me with the way that you all defend him.. You can be so critical of everyone elses play but this guy,...this guy gets a pass. But why ?

He's a Raider and I'm officially done talking about him here. I'll save it for another area where I can talk and see the look in someones eyes when they realize that ot's not just hate, but the fact that I'm a fan of this team who wasn't willing to settle for subpar play at the most important position in all of sports.

Jason Campbell is a bum and I'm done talking about him.

Have fun with this.[/quote]
I find that you attacking JC's character reprehensive more than anything about his play. Actually, when you made that post that set off this firestorm, it was about his character. If you are so inclined to believing and propagating nearly libelous or calumnious beliefs based on a person's ability to play football or his honest (and as discreet as possible) assessment of the play of the guys around him, then I say that you have a personal vendetta against him that extends to much more than just bad QB play.

Not only that, you go accusing folks of beliefs that may not hold. I, for one, believe that Jason Campbell simply requires too large of a margin for error to make it in the playoffs without an exceptional supporting cast.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=Mattyk;719923]I think he needs to be with another team or two to technically be considered a journeyman.[/quote]

Do you mean we don't have a good enough evidence sample to determine JC is a journeyman? If so, I agree. I will also stick to my opinion that that's what he has shown me he is so far.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

This is another topic people need to get over with. My God, why do we have such whining fans. I don't think even Vinny get such anger-filled posts. :doh:

Re: Good for Campbell
 

Alright so I attacked his character by pointing out that he much like a teammate of his "threw the O-Line" under the bus ? If that's attacking his character then you are making my point. There was a double standard that he could say something and it was okay but if someone else did then it may or may not be wrong. When I spoke about him I never attacked him as a person, I attacked him as a player. His play on the field, not what he did for children but what he did on the field. Maybe that was wrong of me, if I can't talk about him as a player then why are we here ? Like I said in another thread I can go on Albert Haynesworth, Clinton Portis, Dan Snyder, Vinny Cerato, and whoever else the majority deems worthy of slander here but not the ones that you all view as being liked. GTripp I wasn't saying that Collins was the answer just making an observation that we had enough and a guy who had less talent than Jason IMO was able to produce against good, not bad teams. And Todd Collins was calling protections. If he wasn't he told someone something. He pointed something out. Checked a receivers route. But if you didn't see it then it didn't happen I guess. i know what I saw, I know what I see the good QB's do. JC just didn't do it IMO. There is an article that came out prior to the '09 season where JC speaks about having less to think about because the O-Line has blitz rules and he doesn't have to call his protections. You say that the systems that we had did not ask for the QB to call a protection because the coaches did it. Really ? So when the middle linebacker changes something the QB isn't allowed to ? If you looked at the video I pointed out to you then you would know that you were fairly incorrect on that one.

I just finished watching Donovan lead a scoring drive. The latest #17 is no longer here and I am seriously done talking about him. If you all are confused in any way about what I've said in this post then I don't know what to do. Last but not least, SolidSnake I was serious. Once again I was just giving yet another example of the Jason Campbell double standard. Where yes Portis was a headache for Jim Zorn, and he was said to have thrown JC under the bus but all he did was say what JC would say about himself. MAYBE you all don't remember but Jason himself would say that he is not an in your face vocal leader. That's all that Clinton said, JC took it to heart but all Clinton really did was reaffirm what Jason said about himself.

To end, SirClintonPortis you are funny. I have a personal vendetta against him because I say that he's not a good QB ? Never made this thing personal, please take time to actually read what I said and if I said anything about his character as a man, human being, guy from the south, whatever please show me where.

Damn my Skins look good.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

Regardless of what Collins was actually changing at the line in his few plays this season, is there any reason to believe the protection was actually better when he was in? I mean, Collins looked great when he was in and his first read on a play came open -- he was accurate and could stick it in there -- but seemed to me that things broke down for sir scrappy just as quickly as they did for Campbell, and usually with more disastrous results.

If the point is Collins [I]seemed[/I] to the untrained eye to be more in charge before the snap than the starter, well, great. I don't care.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=GTripp0012;719910]There's film evidence of Campbell misreading the coverage, missing open receivers, and not giving plays a chance to develop. [B]There's just as much, if not more, film evidence of him doing a good job in the presnap phase, making fast reads, getting to third and fourth receivers, and making great throw under pressure[/B] (he's a top ten quarterback, statistically, under pressure).[/quote]I would argue against this point. He consistently misread pre-snap coverages and when the first option was covered went straight to his checkdown ignoring the second/third reads. Nor did he "make a bunch of great throws under pressure". What was more prevalent on film was Campbell making decent throws if his first read was open or using his size and stregth to avoid a rush and make a dump-off play for solid yardage. Under pressure he often misfired, missed secondary options, or forced a pass into double/triple coverage or a bad spot in a zone.....actually he did this with no pressure too.

[quote]Campbell had almost 550 plays last year. He missed a wide open receiver maybe 8-9 times. He might have passed on a tough but makable throw two or three times as often.

If of 550 plays in the season, there are 180 bad plays made by the quarterback (sacks, avoidable incompletions, interceptions), and 20-30 of them are because the quarterback got confused and missed his read or held the ball too long, and cost the team some points and perhaps half a win to a win, well, there's room for improvement. But by NFL standards, there's not a problem.[/quote]Are you saying that JC only made 2 or less bad plays (mis-reads of coverage, blitz protection, audibles, bad progressions, bad throws) and that his play was responsible for no more than one loss last year or am I misreading what you said?

[quote]A good analyst focuses on the 150 plays that went bad with Campbell doing his job at least respectably. Doesn't make the other 30 excusable mistakes, but if you fix 8 mistakes by changing the QB to someone better, and now have 170 bad passing plays in a season, well, what have you really done?[/quote]A good analyst doesn't focus primarily on stats but looks at them in context. A good analyst also focuses on the game situation and evaluates a player's performance based on plays that are made/not made when all other positions do their job. If the OL gives up a sack it's not on the QB, WR drops a ball not on the QB, QB makes a piss-poor read and throws into double coverage and gets lucky the DB dropped the ball...very bad play the QB, not just an INCP. QB misreads coverage and launches a ball down the sideline for an INT, but missed a wide open WR as a second progression that would've been a 20 yd+ play....terrible play by the QB.

Please tell me you aren't suggesting the difference between a top tier QB and Campbell is 8 plays a season. Campbell was in the top ten in Comp % last year, take a look at the other guys above him and the next five below him. Tell me what you notice about his stat line vs. those other guys.....it's glaring and considered the most important stat for a QB.

JC was second in the league in YAC at 54.3% behind only Stafford for guys throwing for over 1000 yards. This is not a good stat, your top tier QBs are generally in the 44-46% YAC range. This indicates what we all see on film....JC got a lot of yardage from dump-offs and screens. No one is nominating Zorn for the HoF for coaching, but he scaled his offense to what Campbell could do....and it wasn't an effective mid-deep passing game. I don't have the exact stat, but if I remember correctly JC was also top or close to tops in the NFL in passes thrown within 10 yds of the LoS.

If JC was anything other than a lower level starter or solid backup, why did we only get a 4th rounder in 2012 for him....from the Raiders, who were basically QB-less. Conversely we gave up a high 2nd and 3rd/4th in 2011 for McNabb on what could turn out to be (worst case) a one year rental and McNabb is what, six years older than JC.


Quick link on the Raiders/Cowboys game....the parts about JC are same-old, same-old.

[URL="http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5j-3MQIYOpzygOvlt3OaW7sullfCg"]The Canadian Press: Raiders first-team offence under QB Jason Campbell struggles in exhibition opener[/URL]


All that being said, Campbell is certainly no "bum" as some have suggested. Ryan Leaf is a bum, JaMarshmellow is a bum. Campbell is a good teammate and a high character guy. His QB performance/progression last year left something to be desired, but he's no bum.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

So let's see in the past 9 months we've added a Super Bowl winning GM, a Super Bowl winning HC, a franchise QB, and a stud LT (among other things), and we just won our preseason opener 42-17...yet we still want to keep harping on Jason Campbell (and Campbell vs. Todd Collins-neither of whom are here anymore-from 2007)?

Raise your hand if you want this thread locked and put out of its misery

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;720316]Quick link on the Raiders/Cowboys game....the parts about JC are same-old, same-old.

[URL="http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5j-3MQIYOpzygOvlt3OaW7sullfCg"]The Canadian Press: Raiders first-team offence under QB Jason Campbell struggles in exhibition opener[/URL][/quote]

From that article:

[quote]"Campbell was 7 for 13 for 49 yards in his first game with the Raiders, with most of his completions coming on short passes underneath."[/quote]

Hate to beat the dead horse, but yeah, same old, same old.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

At this point, being a Campbell apologist is about as relevant as being a typewriter repairman.

He had every chance in the world to prove himself here and the bottom line is that he never got it done. He just does not have the consistent decision making ability that the above average to great quarterbacks have. Jason Campbell has all the physcal tools and is a quality guy but he is a big reason why this franchise has been hamstrung for years.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

Here I am still in my PJ's and I'm stunned -- stunned I tellya-- that a Jason Campbell thread is commanding so much attention at this point!

The irony in my observations, of course, is that I'm just as guilty by adding my 2 cents.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=12thMan;720407]Here I am still in my PJ's and I'm stunned -- stunned I tellya-- that a Jason Campbell thread is commanding so much attention at this point!

The irony in my observations, of course, is that I'm just as guilty by adding my 2 cents.[/quote]It's 10am, what the heck are you doing in your PJs? I've been up since 7:15.....ooops I forgot after being married for 10 years there's these things called bars/parties and such that you young cats do on Fri. night :food-smil

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=Mattyk;719920]Nobody reveres him or thinks he's a star. He's a middle of the road QB. He's no Manning or Brady, but he's certainly not garbage or a bum. [/quote]

QFMFT. It's so tiring trying to defend this position which should be fairly obvious now. The argument that anyone who doesn't think Campbell is a pox on the NFL must instead believe he's a star in the making is such a straw man and bothering to try and explain why it's so ridiculous reminds one of a saying about arguing on the internet and the Special Olympics.

Re: Good for Campbell
 

[quote=SmootSmack;720375]So let's see in the past 9 months we've added a Super Bowl winning GM, a Super Bowl winning HC, a franchise QB, and a stud LT (among other things), and we just won our preseason opener 42-17...yet we still want to keep harping on Jason Campbell (and Campbell vs. Todd Collins-neither of whom are here anymore-from 2007)?

Raise your hand if you want this thread locked and put out of its misery[/quote]

I'd like to add that Grossman (who most people were saying, stick a fork in us if he ever takes the field) was the one lighting it up last night. Not that it really means anything, preseason being preseason and all, but let's be clear on what last night's "win" really means.

FWIW, considering the [URL="http://bleacherreport.com/articles/391523-the-top-25-quartebacks-wives-and-girlfriends#page/13"]wonderful personality[/URL] that Mrs. Grossman possesses, I think it would be great if Rex got more PT. You know, more crowd reaction shots and what not. Sure as hell beats the crowd shot of Donovan's mom.

(Of course JC17 isn't doing bad in that department either, maybe if we had gotten more of [URL="http://bleacherreport.com/articles/391523-the-top-25-quartebacks-wives-and-girlfriends#page/10"]these kinds of images[/URL] last year the 'Path would be more favorably disposed to him??)