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]No, he's definitely got it. Most of us have already seen it. Others, I'm not sure what type of team success measure you're waiting for, but I'm guessing that it doesn't actually reflect on Campbell as a player.

We are trying to find ways to improve his productivity. Giving him more time would be one. Allowing his young receivers to develop another.

I'm not even sure why rebuilding the OL would be a bad thing even if they QB was a problem.

Anyway, Randle El is thriving in his 3-5 targets a game role in the offense. Cooley is having a good season. Moss has been explosive. Campbell has fueled all three of these things. I think dependability is an issue that Moss cannot fix. Obviously someone needs to step up and help Campbell, and I'm confident that someone will soon, in the same way that Mason has stepped up and helped out Flacco.

I'm guessing that Campbell-Moss though is never going to be an elite passing combination. I have optimism that Campbell-Kelly will be.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

Clearly we need to sign a QB to take JC's place.

Patrick Ramsey is an UFA, we should sign him maybe he'll finally get a chance to show his stuff. Gibran Hamdan is also available, we gave up on him wayyyyy to soon and should pick him up as he is probably ready to blossom.

C'mon guys, can we have just a bit of perspective? How many teams would snap up JC in a heartbeat if they had the chance? More than one or two.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

I want JC to suceed just as much as anyone, but I think he is just not good enough to lead us to a Superbowl. He just does not win games. At this point, he is a veteran. Joe Gibbs gave up two 1st rounders for him, and he has not produced. We have the weapons(Moss, Cooley, and Randel El), we have the running game, now its time we decide if we have a quarterback.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

One thought I have about JC, last year before his injury, I can think of several games where I thought he had cost us the game (i believe it was Dallas he threw a late int on). This year he is successfully (7 wins ) managing the games and absolutely not actively costing us any with a critically timed INT or Fumble. So I would say he has progressed in that way.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;506307]Clearly we need to sign a QB to take JC's place.

Patrick Ramsey is an UFA, we should sign him maybe he'll finally get a chance to show his stuff. Gibran Hamdan is also available, we gave up on him wayyyyy to soon and should pick him up as he is probably ready to blossom.

C'mon guys, can we have just a bit of perspective? How many teams would snap up JC in a heartbeat if they had the chance? More than one or two.[/quote]
Not sure I would want to play for any of those teams that would snatch him up in a heartbeat. I have not given up on JC but his time to prove his ability is getting shorter.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

JC is a good quarterback. If the guy gets time back there, he has shown he can get it done, and how many dropped passes did we see yesterday or JC running for his life once again. Get off the guys back!!

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

i like JC but i dont know if hes the answer....we are almost out of playoff contention. one more loss and the season is done..im then all for bringing in brennan to see what he can do....less we forget campbell had a losing record last year. coliins led us to the playoffs.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=T.O.Killa;506310]I want JC to suceed just as much as anyone, but I think he is just not good enough to lead us to a Superbowl. He just does not win games. At this point, he is a veteran. Joe Gibbs gave up two 1st rounders for him, and he has not produced. We have the weapons(Moss, Cooley, and Randel El), we have the running game, now its time we decide if we have a quarterback.[/quote]

I was at the game. What I noticed right off of the back was that JC didn't go through his progressions and never returned to the open receiver which on most occassions was Randle El. On several plays, Randle El was waving his hands signaling JC to throw the ball. Cooley was opened on several occassions too. It is frustrating to watch a team with so many weapons and have a QB struggle to get the ball to them. Malcolm Kelly was also overlooked on several plays. I have come to the conclusion that JC has become contempt with throwing the short ball and doesn't want to throw and INT even when it seems WRS are bigger than their defender.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=SUNRA;506320]I was at the game. What I noticed right off of the back was that JC didn't go through his progressions and never returned to the open receiver which on most occassions was Randle El. On several plays, Randle El was waving his hands signaling JC to throw the ball. Cooley was opened on several occassions too. It is frustrating to watch a team with so many weapons and have a QB struggle to get the ball to them. Malcolm Kelly was also overlooked on several plays. I have come to the conclusion that JC has become contempt with throwing the short ball and doesn't want to throw and INT even when it seems WRS are bigger than their defender.[/quote]


Dude, if you can see whether a QB goes through his progressions from the stands, you have magical powers. I can hardly make out whether JC is going through progressions on television.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

Quarterbacks and Coaches always seem crappy after a few key losses.
There are about 50 other people that contribute to this.

Will Campbell ever be a Hall of Famer?
Doubtful

Can he be an effective game manager? Yes.
That is why he was drafted in the first place.
No one thought he'd be a Super Stud.

I'd say if he's ever a top 10 QB, he's reached his potential.
And that is not too far from where he is now.
He needs more time, more weapons and more experience.
We'll know by this time next year if we need to look elsewhere or stick with him for 5 more years.

We all hoped to know this by now...unfortunately, Campbell is still a question mark to me.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=skinsnut;506344]Quarterbacks and Coaches always seem crappy after a few key losses.
There are about 50 other people that contribute to this.

Will Campbell ever be a Hall of Famer?
Doubtful

Can he be an effective game manager? Yes.
That is why he was drafted in the first place.
No one thought he'd be a Super Stud.

I'd say if he's ever a top 10 QB, he's reached his potential.
And that is not too far from where he is now.
He needs more time, more weapons and more experience.
We'll know by this time next year if we need to look elsewhere or stick with him for 5 more years.

We all hoped to know this by now...unfortunately, Campbell is still a question mark to me.[/quote]

No one thought he'd be a super stud?! They gave up 3 draft picks for him so I think somebody thought he'd be pretty close to a super stud.

This time next year JC wont be the Skins starting QB.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=irish;506352]No one thought he'd be a super stud?! They gave up 3 draft picks for him so I think somebody thought he'd be pretty close to a super stud.

This time next year JC wont be the Skins starting QB.[/quote]

Aren't these predictions of yours getting tired already?

I thought you said a similar thing last year or during the preseason?

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]

Huh? Mason is no Santana Moss. The running backs have been injured all season and if they weren't they're no Portis. So who in the hell he has for help. Last time i checked Ray Lewis and Reed dont play offense.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=prinzeofmoval;506409]Huh? Mason is no Santana Moss. The running backs have been injured all season and if they weren't they're no Portis. So who in the hell he has for help. Last time i checked Ray Lewis and Reed dont play offense.[/quote]Mason is more reliable than Santana Moss, and in our ball control offense, he would be more valuable to us. Clayton is the better Moss comparison anyway, as he's just as explosive, but has enjoyed a better season IMO.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

Its a combination of things. For one when receviers are getting open its when people blitz us and then the o-line is not protecting us. When they dont blitz no one can get open. The o-line sucks. The D is to blame for a lot of this too. The Giants went right down the field with ease on their first drive. At this point the whole team stinks. I see no bright spots. So dont blame it all on JC. Plus CP is still hurt and teams double Moss and then we have nothing but the underneath stuff because the other receivers aren't getting open. My only real complaint about JC is he needs to throw a better deep ball. So he puts it infront of the receivers so only they can get it or its too long. He has under thrown a few passes this year.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=Mattyk72;506354]Aren't these predictions of yours getting tired already?

I thought you said a similar thing last year or during the preseason?[/quote]

You have a good memory Matty, I did say in preseason that by 2010 JC will not be the Skins starter. I have no idea who the starter will be but it wont be JC. Of course if/when my prediction is proven right all the "experts" on this site will say that "yes in fact they knew all along JC had problems and was never going to make it from the first time they saw him take a snap". It happens all the time.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

Well you've also made a few other bold predictions that ended up wrong, so we shall see.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

is irish the new offiss?

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

I was thinking the same thing. irish's dislike of JC = offiss love of Ramsey.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=Mattyk72;506493]Well you've also made a few other bold predictions that ended up wrong, so we shall see.[/quote]

Correct again. I have made some bold predictions that were wrong and some that were right. The difference between me and 99% of the other "experts" on this site is that I admit when I was wrong, they never would.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=irish;506504]Correct again. I have made some bold predictions that were wrong and some that were right. The difference between me and 99% of the other "experts" on this site is that I admit when I was wrong, they never would.[/quote]

I've seen plenty of people here who admit it when they are wrong so you shouldn't be so quick to pat yourself on the back. More often than not people own up, I'd say the people that don't are in the minority.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

Just heard that JC is the fifth most sacked QB in the league. That cant be helping him grow as a player.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

I am not saying that it is all JC's fault. There were three dropped passes on Sunday, for example.

Give him a secondary receiver, someone who is ready to step in now, someone who is
6'4"or taller. He needs a 2nd option for throwing downfield. When Moss is covered, there is no plan B.
If this does not help, THEN we may need to think of another option at QB.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=irish;506490]You have a good memory Matty, I did say in preseason that by 2010 JC will not be the Skins starter. I have no idea who the starter will be but it wont be JC. Of course if/when my prediction is proven right all the "experts" on this site will say that "yes in fact they knew all along JC had problems and was never going to make it from the first time they saw him take a snap". It happens all the time.[/quote]

I openly eat crow whenever I'm proven wrong. I bumped two threads some time ago in which I said Ramsey and Michael Boulware were going to be All Pro studs. I also recently praised the hell out of Blache after blasting him in the preseason and after Week 1. I think the majority of people on this site own up to mistakes.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=T.O.Killa;506705]Just heard that JC is the fifth most sacked QB in the league. That cant be helping him grow as a player.[/quote]

hmmmm, great point!

But I am sure Colt wouldn't get sacked. All his quality prep with the Rainbow Warriors will prevent that...

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

[quote=T.O.Killa;506705]Just heard that JC is the fifth most sacked QB in the league. That cant be helping him grow as a player.[/quote]He's taken 32 sacks this season.

But be careful when you hear 5th most sacked QB. QBs with extremely high sack rates also have higher injury rates (for all the obvious reasons), and thus tend to play on fewer plays and consequently have fewer total sacks.

So where "Washington QB" has taken 32 sacks, note that:

Kansas City QB has taken 32 sacks
Oakland QB has taken 32 sacks (and they run 75% of the time)
Jacksonville QB has taken 33 sacks
Minnesota QB has taken 33 sacks
Pittsburgh QB has taken 37 sacks (including 5 by our DL)
St. Louis QB has taken 37 sacks
New England QB has taken 40 sacks
Cincinnati QB has taken 43 sacks
San Francisco QB has taken 43 sacks
Detroit QB has taken 45 sacks

Overall, when you consider that we've faced all the best teams at sacking the QB, our Adjusted Sack Rate comes out to 6.5%, which is the league average.

This is partly because the OL isn't quite as horrible as the rap on them is, part because Portis is a monster in pass protection, but mostly because Campbell spent most of the first half of the year making people miss clean in the backfield, and creating big plays off of them.

Re: JC is not what I thought part two
 

We also use some craptastic blocking schemes at times. Like, against Seattle, a team that has no ability to rush the passer whatsover, we gave up an easy sack to Darryl Tapp because Todd Yoder tried to block him coming off the end, but just ended up diving at his feet. Chris Samuels had absolutely no one to block on the play, and ended up getting lost in traffic because Yoder was [I]just that horrible[/I] on the play.

Todd Yoder has given up three sacks this year, in part because Zorn thinks he's some sort of superhuman blocker, but also in part because he's terrible.