Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

I was hoping that Campbell would play well this year, but so far he isn't. I said earlier in preseason that there's a fine line with playing a good game versus not (playing a good game). The difference is the plays that are made that either win or lose games. He made a few plays that definitely contributed to losing the games with Detroit and New York.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=bigant;599120]stop it he stinks,who cares what the numbers say,in big spots he is a dear in headlights enough said,.......[/quote]

You do realize that JC had the same look when he was undefeated and won a national championship at Auburn, right?

Let's face it, you just don't like the way that JC looks, whatever that means.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Just curious for those that are convinced the numbers lie, is there anyone else in the top 10 or 15 that is also a complete fraud like JC?

[url=http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?season=2009&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&tabSeq=0&statisticCategory=PASSING&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=PASSING_PASSER_RATING&d-447263-n=1]NFL Stats: by Player Category[/url]

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=firstdown;599221]All those are great numbers so now he needs to throw some TD's before the last 5min. of the game and a win would be nice. [B]You do know that a QB can throw for 1000's of yeards but if he does not win it means nothing.[/B][/quote]

I disagree. I think that the "Qb's are judged by wins" saying is faux wisdom, since football is a team game which is not determined by one player. Look at Aaron Rodgers in Green Bay. He has an 8-11 record as a starter. But most teams in the NFL would love to have him under center.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=warriorzpath;599240]I was hoping that Campbell would play well this year, but so far he isn't. I said earlier in preseason that there's a fine line with playing a good game versus not (playing a good game). The difference is the plays that are made that either win or lose games. He made a few plays that definitely contributed to losing the games with Detroit and New York.[/quote]

You're obviously NOT watching the games very closely. He is playing very well...unlike most of the team.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Mattyk72;599245]Just curious for those that are convinced the numbers lie, is there anyone else in the top 10 or 15 that is also a complete fraud like JC?

[URL="http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?season=2009&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&tabSeq=0&statisticCategory=PASSING&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=PASSING_PASSER_RATING&d-447263-n=1"]NFL Stats: by Player Category[/URL][/quote]

These numbers aren't lying, JC is playing great...but I'll throw Kolb and Sanchez into the "fraud" or at least overachieving category. :D

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Mattyk72;599169]With a yards per attempt of 7.8, I think we need to reconsider this notion that all JC does is throw dump offs. It's just not the case this year. Plus if you've watched the games at all you know what the deal is. If you're paying attention that is.[/quote]

I don't think I said that's all he throws but certainly his completion stats are padded by them. I believe I said "short and/or safe passes"...but i think it speaks to the overall point that he racks up yards and completions when we are playing from behind against a soft defense. He stays very conservative or absent for stretches during the early to middle parts of games.

But Matty, let's break it down by the quarter, to make sure we are paying "attention" to detail:
[I][B][SIZE=1]"short passes" denote short throws with YAC as determined by play-by-play commentator[/SIZE][/B][/I]

[SIZE=3][B]NYG - 1 intermediate pass completed, 1 deep pass completed[/B][/SIZE]
[U]1Q: 1-1, 7 yds[/U]
1 short pass (7 yds on 3rd and 18); [I][B]ZERO deep or intermediate passes attempted[/B][/I]
[U]2Q: 6-10, 106 yds, 1 INT, 1 FUMBLE for TD[/U];
5 short passes; 1 intermediate pass completed (12yds thru the air, ARE runs for 22 after a broken tackle); [I][B]ZERO deep passes completed[/B][/I]
[U]3Q[B]:[/B] 5-7, 37 yds[/U]
5 short passes; [B][I]ZERO deep or intermediate passes attempted[/I][/B]
[U]4Q: 6-8, 61 yds, 1TD[/U]
5 short passes; [B][I]1 deep pass completed for 17yd-TD with 1:37 left in the game[/I][/B]

[B][SIZE=3]STL -[/SIZE][/B] [B][SIZE=3]3 intermediate passes completed; 1 deep completed[/SIZE][/B]
[U]1Q: 6-10, 52 yds[/U]
5 short passes, 1 intermediate passes (15); [B][I]ZERO deep passes completed[/I][/B]
[U]2Q: 9-15, 96 yds [/U]
7 short passes, 1 intermediate pass (15); [B][I]1 deep pass to Moss for 21[/I][/B]
[U]3Q: 4-5, 47yds[/U]
4 short passes, 1 intermediate pass to ARE; [B][I]ZERO deep passes attemped[/I][/B]
[U]4Q: 4-6, 47yds[/U]
4 short passes (25yd screen pass to betts); [B][I]ZERO intermediate or deep balls completed[/I][/B]

[B][SIZE=3]DET - 3 intermediate passes (2 against prevent), 3 deep passes (1 against prevent)[/SIZE][/B]
[U]1Q: 6-8, 80yds [/U]<--good first drive
5 short passes (1 Moss ran for 21 after breaking tackle); [B][I]1 deep pass to Thomas (18 yds)[/I][/B]
[U]2Q: 2-5, 21yd[/U]
2 short passes in flat with 5 YAC;[B][I] ZERO intermediate or deep passes completed[/I][/B]
[U]3Q: 4-7, 99 yds, 1 TD, 1 INT[/U]
2 short passes, 1 intermediate pass, [B][I]1 BEAUTIFUL deep 57yd TD to Moss[/I][/B]
[U]4Q: 15-21, 133yds, 1 TD[/U] (no huddle offense 8-8 72yds & 4-7 for 48)
12 short passes, 2 intermediate passes, [B][I]1 deep pass to moss for 21 yds against prevent defense[/I][/B]

[B][SIZE=3]TOTAL (thru 3 games): 7 intermediate passes; 5 deep passes...a WHOLE lotta short or conservative throws[/SIZE][/B]

I count 57...Look that's the nature of the WCO, i understand, but let's not make Campbell out to be something that he isnt...an elite QB. Just because he has a high completion percentage and a decent amount of passing yards, it does NOT make him a great QB. Sure he has shown improvement from last year but it's not being reflected in the W-L column or TD #'s thus far.

I was just rationalizing the reasons for the deceptive stats. Most of his yards and completions come on passes less than 10 yards. THOSE ARE THE FACTS!

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]


I do not fall into the camp of people that want to oust Campbell. I think he is talented, and more than capable of leading us to the playoffs (but for our old, damaged line). That said, the QB rating metric is off, I believe due to the fact that 2/3 of the TDs he has tossed came in "garbage-ish" time. I know the defenses didn't "want to give up those TDs" but the games were pretty much in hand at that point (yes, I know we could have come back and beaten detroit, but we didn't). Campbell has always been accurate, its his fumbles (which he recovers) and his poor INTs that are killer. That said, I think Jason has a bright future, if we let him grow.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

I'd love to see some stats picked apart from other QBs so we can see who else is not really "elite".

By the way I never said he was elite or even great, just good, and better than some are willing to give him credit for, that's all.

And again, ultimately my argument on all of this is our problems run much deeper than JC.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Mattyk72;599266]I'd love to see some stats picked apart from other QBs so we can see who else is not really "elite".

By the way I never said he was elite or even great, just good, and better than some are willing to give him credit for, that's all.

And again, ultimately my argument on all of this is our problems run much deeper than JC.[/quote]

in support of mattyk, football outsiders was very high on campbell coming into the season. He's accurate and his receivers led the league in dropped balls (i think).

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Rajmahal33;599263]I don't think I said that's all he throws but certainly his completion stats are padded by them. I believe I said "short and/or safe passes"...but i think it speaks to the overall point that he racks up yards and completions when we are playing from behind against a soft defense. He stays very conservative or absent for stretches during the early to middle parts of games.

But Matty, let's break it down by the quarter, to make sure we are paying "attention" to detail:
[I][B][SIZE=1]BLAH BLAH BLAH[/SIZE][/B][/I]

I count 57...Look that's the nature of the WCO, i understand, but let's not make Campbell out to be something that he isnt...an elite QB. Just because he has a high completion percentage and a decent amount of passing yards, it does NOT make him a great QB. Sure he has shown improvement from last year but it's not being reflected in the W-L column or TD #'s thus far.

I was just rationalizing the reasons for the deceptive stats. Most of his yards and completions come on passes less than 10 yards. THOSE ARE THE FACTS![/quote]

The whole premise of "deceptive facts" is nothing more than petty nitpicking to try to keep your pessimism intact. I do not hear you criticizing Tom Brady for hitting Welker on short slants over 100 times last season.

This is the NFL, not Madden on your Playstation. No team can succeed and win by chucking 40-50 yard bombs every play.

Campbell has shown maturity and efficiency. He HAS been limited by some questionable playcalling by Zorn, especially in the RZ, but he has played extremely well despite having plenty of TDs dropped and been forced to hand off in critical situations.

It sounds like there is nothing JC could do to make you stop hating him.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Can I get a show of hands, How many people on this board believe that on any of our stretch left goalline plays in the last 2 games, a fake hand off/JC rollout would have scored at least 1 TD. I do.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;599272]Can I get a show of hands, How many people on this board believe that on any of our stretch left goalline plays in the last 2 games, a fake hand off/JC rollout would have scored at least 1 TD. I do.[/quote]

JC would score every time on that play...also a playaction pass to Cooley could have scored.

I have no idea what Zorn was thinking. The first time, OK, bad decision...but he TRIED IT AGAIN!

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;599272]Can I get a show of hands, How many people on this board believe that on any of our stretch left goalline plays in the last 2 games, a fake hand off/JC rollout would have scored at least 1 TD. I do.[/quote]

It sure would be worth a try. Why not run a naked boot? Or how about a little play action? We're so predictable at this point you can't tell me a PA fake down there wouldn't work.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Rajmahal33;599263]I don't think I said that's all he throws but certainly his completion stats are padded by them. I believe I said "short and/or safe passes"...but i think it speaks to the overall point that he racks up yards and completions when we are playing from behind against a soft defense. He stays very conservative or absent for stretches during the early to middle parts of games.

But Matty, let's break it down by the quarter, to make sure we are paying "attention" to detail:
[I][B][SIZE=1]"short passes" denote short throws with YAC as determined by play-by-play commentator[/SIZE][/B][/I]

[SIZE=3][B]NYG - 1 intermediate pass completed, 1 deep pass completed[/B][/SIZE]
[U]1Q: 1-1, 7 yds[/U]
1 short pass (7 yds on 3rd and 18); [I][B]ZERO deep or intermediate passes attempted[/B][/I]
[U]2Q: 6-10, 106 yds, 1 INT, 1 FUMBLE for TD[/U];
5 short passes; 1 intermediate pass completed (12yds thru the air, ARE runs for 22 after a broken tackle); [I][B]ZERO deep passes completed[/B][/I]
[U]3Q[B]:[/B] 5-7, 37 yds[/U]
5 short passes; [B][I]ZERO deep or intermediate passes attempted[/I][/B]
[U]4Q: 6-8, 61 yds, 1TD[/U]
5 short passes; [B][I]1 deep pass completed for 17yd-TD with 1:37 left in the game[/I][/B]

[B][SIZE=3]STL -[/SIZE][/B] [B][SIZE=3]3 intermediate passes completed; 1 deep completed[/SIZE][/B]
[U]1Q: 6-10, 52 yds[/U]
5 short passes, 1 intermediate passes (15); [B][I]ZERO deep passes completed[/I][/B]
[U]2Q: 9-15, 96 yds [/U]
7 short passes, 1 intermediate pass (15); [B][I]1 deep pass to Moss for 21[/I][/B]
[U]3Q: 4-5, 47yds[/U]
4 short passes, 1 intermediate pass to ARE; [B][I]ZERO deep passes attemped[/I][/B]
[U]4Q: 4-6, 47yds[/U]
4 short passes (25yd screen pass to betts); [B][I]ZERO intermediate or deep balls completed[/I][/B]

[B][SIZE=3]DET - 3 intermediate passes (2 against prevent), 3 deep passes (1 against prevent)[/SIZE][/B]
[U]1Q: 6-8, 80yds [/U]<--good first drive
5 short passes (1 Moss ran for 21 after breaking tackle); [B][I]1 deep pass to Thomas (18 yds)[/I][/B]
[U]2Q: 2-5, 21yd[/U]
2 short passes in flat with 5 YAC;[B][I] ZERO intermediate or deep passes completed[/I][/B]
[U]3Q: 4-7, 99 yds, 1 TD, 1 INT[/U]
2 short passes, 1 intermediate pass, [B][I]1 BEAUTIFUL deep 57yd TD to Moss[/I][/B]
[U]4Q: 15-21, 133yds, 1 TD[/U] (no huddle offense 8-8 72yds & 4-7 for 48)
12 short passes, 2 intermediate passes, [B][I]1 deep pass to moss for 21 yds against prevent defense[/I][/B]

[B][SIZE=3]TOTAL (thru 3 games): 7 intermediate passes; 5 deep passes...a WHOLE lotta short or conservative throws[/SIZE][/B]

I count 57...Look that's the nature of the WCO, i understand, but let's not make Campbell out to be something that he isnt...an elite QB. Just because he has a high completion percentage and a decent amount of passing yards, it does NOT make him a great QB. Sure he has shown improvement from last year but it's not being reflected in the W-L column or TD #'s thus far.

I was just rationalizing the reasons for the deceptive stats. Most of his yards and completions come on passes less than 10 yards. THOSE ARE THE FACTS![/quote]
:doh:

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Buster;599273]JC would score every time on that play...also a playaction pass to Cooley could have scored.

I have no idea what Zorn was thinking. The first time, OK, bad decision...but he TRIED IT AGAIN![/quote]

As I've repeatedly stated, had Zorn called a naked bootleg on that goal line 4th and 1, JC would have walked untouched. The only defender that could have gotten to him was pretty much out of position to do anything.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Buster;599269]The whole premise of "deceptive facts" is nothing more than petty nitpicking to try to keep your pessimism intact. I do not hear you criticizing Tom Brady for hitting Welker on short slants over 100 times last season.

This is the NFL, not Madden on your Playstation. No team can succeed and win by chucking 40-50 yard bombs every play.

Campbell has shown maturity and efficiency. He HAS been limited by some questionable playcalling by Zorn, especially in the RZ, but he has played extremely well despite having plenty of TDs dropped and been forced to hand off in critical situations.

It sounds like there is nothing JC could do to make you stop hating him.[/quote]

Buster, I think i made it pretty clear that i didn't expect them to bomb it a whole lot since this is a WCO (But go ahead and sensationalize my argument without offering anything but vaque generic statements that everyone knows on ur end).

I DO wanna see us complete a LOT more passes thru three games that are 15+ yards thru the air. If JC and the offense sticks with these numbers, it's gonna be much more of what we saw during the second half of last season. Let's also not forget that we played two of the WORST defenses in the NFL in St. Louis and Detroit!

Matty, i'll agree that scrutinizing their stats would probably show weaknesses in their game, but when you see QB's like Manning, Brady, Warner, Brees, and Rivers stretch the field a whole lot more than we do and have comparable yards per attempt numbers and completion percentages it seems like they take more risks (and ultimately get more rewards). For every three 10 yard plays that JC completes, they are getting a 25 yard play down the field (and maybe missing one as well). Overall, they are scoring more TD's and winning more games...

I will give u that it's still early in the season...so we will see

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Buster;599273]JC would score every time on that play...also a playaction pass to Cooley could have scored.

I have no idea what Zorn was thinking. The first time, OK, bad decision...but he TRIED IT AGAIN![/quote]

if he sets either one up and goes the other way, it will open both options up. Right now, the whole defense keys and overpursues.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Rajmahal33;599281]Buster, I think i made it pretty clear that i didn't expect them to bomb it a whole lot since this is a WCO (But go ahead and sensationalize my argument without offering anything but vaque generic statements that everyone knows on ur end).

I DO wanna see us complete a LOT more passes thru three games that are 15+ yards thru the air. If JC and the offense sticks with these numbers, it's gonna be much more of what we saw during the second half of last season. Let's also not forget that we played two of the WORST defenses in the NFL in St. Louis and Detroit!

Matty, i'll agree that scrutinizing their stats would probably show weaknesses in their game, but when you see QB's like Manning, Brady, Warner, Brees, and Rivers stretch the field a whole lot more than we do and have comparable yards per attempt numbers and completion percentages it seems like they take more risks (and ultimately get more rewards). For every three 10 yard plays that JC completes, they are getting a 25 yard play down the field (and maybe missing one as well). Overall, they are scoring more TD's and winning more games...

I will give u that it's still early in the season...so we will see[/quote]

If Campbell had Russell's or Delhomme's numbers you'd have a point...in the mean time just stop going out of your way to make Campbell look bad.

Again, I don't understand the logic of placing the blame on a single player. It is the most ridiculous thing I've seen on this board (second only to people's outright hate for JC). Shit, you don't see anyone ranting about CP having a terrible year (b/c he's not Jason Campbell).

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Rajmahal33;599263]I don't think I said that's all he throws but certainly his completion stats are padded by them. I believe I said "short and/or safe passes"...but i think it speaks to the overall point that he racks up yards and completions when we are playing from behind against a soft defense. He stays very conservative or absent for stretches during the early to middle parts of games.

But Matty, let's break it down by the quarter, to make sure we are paying "attention" to detail:
[I][B][SIZE=1]"short passes" denote short throws with YAC as determined by play-by-play commentator[/SIZE][/B][/I]

[SIZE=3][B]NYG - 1 intermediate pass completed, 1 deep pass completed[/B][/SIZE]
[U]1Q: 1-1, 7 yds[/U]
1 short pass (7 yds on 3rd and 18); [I][B]ZERO deep or intermediate passes attempted[/B][/I]
[U]2Q: 6-10, 106 yds, 1 INT, 1 FUMBLE for TD[/U];
5 short passes; 1 intermediate pass completed (12yds thru the air, ARE runs for 22 after a broken tackle); [I][B]ZERO deep passes completed[/B][/I]
[U]3Q[B]:[/B] 5-7, 37 yds[/U]
5 short passes; [B][I]ZERO deep or intermediate passes attempted[/I][/B]
[U]4Q: 6-8, 61 yds, 1TD[/U]
5 short passes; [B][I]1 deep pass completed for 17yd-TD with 1:37 left in the game[/I][/B]

[B][SIZE=3]STL -[/SIZE][/B] [B][SIZE=3]3 intermediate passes completed; 1 deep completed[/SIZE][/B]
[U]1Q: 6-10, 52 yds[/U]
5 short passes, 1 intermediate passes (15); [B][I]ZERO deep passes completed[/I][/B]
[U]2Q: 9-15, 96 yds [/U]
7 short passes, 1 intermediate pass (15); [B][I]1 deep pass to Moss for 21[/I][/B]
[U]3Q: 4-5, 47yds[/U]
4 short passes, 1 intermediate pass to ARE; [B][I]ZERO deep passes attemped[/I][/B]
[U]4Q: 4-6, 47yds[/U]
4 short passes (25yd screen pass to betts); [B][I]ZERO intermediate or deep balls completed[/I][/B]

[B][SIZE=3]DET - 3 intermediate passes (2 against prevent), 3 deep passes (1 against prevent)[/SIZE][/B]
[U]1Q: 6-8, 80yds [/U]<--good first drive
5 short passes (1 Moss ran for 21 after breaking tackle); [B][I]1 deep pass to Thomas (18 yds)[/I][/B]
[U]2Q: 2-5, 21yd[/U]
2 short passes in flat with 5 YAC;[B][I] ZERO intermediate or deep passes completed[/I][/B]
[U]3Q: 4-7, 99 yds, 1 TD, 1 INT[/U]
2 short passes, 1 intermediate pass, [B][I]1 BEAUTIFUL deep 57yd TD to Moss[/I][/B]
[U]4Q: 15-21, 133yds, 1 TD[/U] (no huddle offense 8-8 72yds & 4-7 for 48)
12 short passes, 2 intermediate passes, [B][I]1 deep pass to moss for 21 yds against prevent defense[/I][/B]

[B][SIZE=3]TOTAL (thru 3 games): 7 intermediate passes; 5 deep passes...a WHOLE lotta short or conservative throws[/SIZE][/B]

I count 57...[SIZE="5"]Look that's the nature of the WCO, i understand[/SIZE], but let's not make Campbell out to be something that he isnt...an elite QB. Just because he has a high completion percentage and a decent amount of passing yards, it does NOT make him a great QB. Sure he has shown improvement from last year but it's not being reflected in the W-L column or TD #'s thus far.

I was just rationalizing the reasons for the deceptive stats. Most of his yards and completions come on passes less than 10 yards. THOSE ARE THE FACTS![/quote] Since you use size to emphasize points you deem important I figured I'd follow your path. Obviously you don't understand the nature of the WCO. The WCO is built on short passes and RAC/YAC. That is the entire premise of the WCO. If you see the WCO tree we are a direct branch of, Walsh (short passes and YAC) to Holmgren (short passes and YAC) to Zorn (short passes and YAC). It's really hard to take you seriously when your logic is so fundamentally flawed.

I have never seen anyone on this board call JC an elite or great QB, but the other spectrum has been amazing. To read it around here and other places, you'd think he's the second coming of Heath Shuler.

[quote=44Deezel]Bottom line, whatever you think of Campbell, name one other NFL team that would sign him to be their guaranteed, bona fide starter next year if he were to leave the Skins. At best, he would be offered a chance to compete for the starting job on another shitty team. Most teams would sign him to be a backup. Just my opinion.[/quote]
I'm pretty sure Carolina, St. Louis, SF, Oakland, Cleveland, Buffalo and TB would consider him an immediate upgrade to what they have. Which brings up another point. If Campbell leaves next year, who do you propose becomes the starter? Please spare me with the injured 3rd stringer who barely held onto his roster spot thanks to the aforementioned injury.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Ruhskins;599279]As I've repeatedly stated, had Zorn called a naked bootleg on that goal line 4th and 1, JC would have walked untouched. The only defender that could have gotten to him was pretty much out of position to do anything.[/quote]

I've said the same thing numerous times. (sigh) So sad a couple of internet schmoes can figure that out yet that escapes our offensive genius of a HC.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

JC played very well against the lions, he played well against the rams and did not play well against the giants.

JC's stats are in line for him to set career marks but lets not ignore JC's past stats and claim the 3 games of stats he has this year (with a huge portion of positive stats coming against the lions, rams and last 2 mins against the giants) should end all talk of JC not being more than a serviceable decent qb.

we can talk stats at the middle or end of the year; it was the lions, the freakin LIONS, and the JC lovers trot his stat sheet out like they have the cure to cancer.

let see how he looks at seasons end and talk stats. taking one or two games now and ignoring his past 20+ games doesnt seem genuine to me is your a stat lover. seems too selective to focus on one segment of numbers (3 games) and one portion of stats and not comparing them to the whole.

if the JC lovers can start this thread as an end all to the qb debate after he looked great against the lions can the JC bashers start a thread calling for his release after he looks crappy against a top 5 defense? i'd say no to both.

i dont understand either party here. he throws 1 td pass = hallelujah i told them guys JC is our man . . . he throws 1 int = gosh dangit this team is going nowhere with JC at the helm.

go skins!!

ps - this comes off as an "i told you so" thread, i dont want to hear any complaining when JC has a bad game and the JC bashers make their own thread.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Paintrain;599288]I'm pretty sure Carolina, St. Louis, SF, Oakland, Cleveland, Buffalo and TB would consider him an immediate upgrade to what they have. Which brings up another point. [B] If Campbell leaves next year, who do you propose becomes the starter?[/B] Please spare me with the injured 3rd stringer who barely held onto his roster spot thanks to the aforementioned injury.[/quote]

This is the part that kills me about some of the fans...they bitch about not building through the draft or building through the trenches, blah blah blah. If Campbell gets run out of town successfully, basically we will spend our resources on a new QB, instead of spending them on offensive linemen and linebackers.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=over the mountain;599293]JC played very well against the lions, he played well against the rams and did not play well against the giants.

JC's stats are in line for him to set career marks but lets not ignore JC's past stats and claim the 3 games of stats he has this year (with a huge portion of positive stats coming against the lions, rams and last 2 mins against the giants) should end all talk of JC not being more than a serviceable decent qb.

we can talk stats at the middle or end of the year; it was the lions, the freakin LIONS, and the JC lovers trot his stat sheet out like they have the cure to cancer.

let see how he looks at seasons end and talk stats. taking one or two games now and[B] ignoring his past 20+ games doesnt seem genuine to me[/B] is your a stat lover. seems too selective to focus on one segment of numbers (3 games) and one portion of stats and not comparing them to the whole.

if the JC lovers can start this thread as an end all to the qb debate after he looked great against the lions can the JC bashers start a thread calling for his release after he looks crappy against a top 5 defense? i'd say no to both.

i dont understand either party here. he throws 1 td pass = hallelujah i told them guys JC is our man . . . he throws 1 int = gosh dangit this team is going nowhere with JC at the helm.

go skins!![/quote]
Which stats are ignored from his previous 20 games? How he continually improved his completion percentage, QB rating, YPA, TD:INT ratio? Which of those stats reflects negatively on him?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=over the mountain;599293]JC played very well against the lions, he played well against the rams and did not play well against the giants.

JC's stats are in line for him to set career marks but lets not ignore JC's past stats and claim the 3 games of stats he has this year (with a huge portion of positive stats coming against the lions, rams and last 2 mins against the giants) should end all talk of JC not being more than a serviceable decent qb.

we can talk stats at the middle or end of the year; it was the lions, the freakin LIONS, and the JC lovers trot his stat sheet out like they have the cure to cancer.

let see how he looks at seasons end and talk stats. taking one or two games now and ignoring his past 20+ games doesnt seem genuine to me is your a stat lover. seems too selective to focus on one segment of numbers (3 games) and one portion of stats and not comparing them to the whole.

if the JC lovers can start this thread as an end all to the qb debate after he looked great against the lions can the JC bashers start a thread calling for his release after he looks crappy against a top 5 defense? i'd say no to both.

i dont understand either party here. he throws 1 td pass = hallelujah i told them guys JC is our man . . . he throws 1 int = gosh dangit this team is going nowhere with JC at the helm.

go skins!!

ps - this comes off as an "i told you so" thread, i dont want to hear any complaining when JC has a bad game and the JC bashers make their own thread.[/quote]

I'm not a JC lover per se, I just go after people that come up with these "logical" arguments to bash a player that they just plainly don't like (see my posts about D. Hall).

This team will be in a better place if Jason Campbell succeeds, yet a lot of these fans are going out of their way to make the argument that he has failed. He has not succeeded this season (W-L record), but he hasn't failed either. And right now, whether people like it or not, he's the best option we have.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Ruhskins;599294]This is the part that kills me about some of the fans...they bitch about not building through the draft or building through the trenches, blah blah blah. If Campbell gets run out of town successfully, basically we will spend our resources on a new QB, instead of spending them on offensive linemen and linebackers.[/quote]

And I know I've been guilty of it by giving up on Zorn already, but we've got a bunch of mini-Snyders who hate the actual Snyder.

Some 'fans' have already given up on Campbell, despite what he does. If he comes out this week and goes 21-30, 275, 3 TD then it will be 'well yeah, he did it against the Bucs, so what.' It's frustrating but it is what it is.

Among our greatest needs for change are:
Play calling on both sides of the ball
OL
LB
RB
depth at CB

QB play is FAR from our biggest problem but the Madden generation can't comprehend that.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Your first setntence sums it up perfectly

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

DMV, I have agreed with you on many of topics in the past, but honestly I think I found one I can say I agree with you on.

[B][I]People say he doesn't have a quick release.[/I][/B]
It's not just us fans friend it's Zorn also. He has stated JC needs to get the ball out faster. One would think the designer of the master scheme would know best.

[B][I]You can't have a quick release when no one is open.[/I][/B]
I actually believe this is Hixon's fault. He's a failure at WR coach.

[B][I]JC can't read defenses.[/I][/B]
I'll believe this until I'm dead. Maybe it's because he's under center and can't survey the field as well but he seems to change into the wrong play way to many times. In shot gun he's not as bad.

[B][I]He lead his team to a national championship in college. [/I][/B]
I credit him for this. I have supported him all the way up until last week. I am now thinking he never would have been drafted had we not picked him up. If JC and Daniels both came out of the same draft we would have cut JC, I have no doubt. Right now we have too much invested in him to simply cut him.

[B][I]-Thomas drops a TD pass[/I][/B]
[I][B]-Sellers drops a TD pass[/B][/I]
[I][B]-Zorn calls a HB option play[/B][/I]
[I][B]-We try to run the ball in at the goal line on 2 separate occasions[/B][/I]
[I][B]-Moss fumbles in the redzone[/B][/I]
I don't think any one would disagree with you on the fact that other players are not doing their part, but that's only half the truth.
-JC over throwing Kelly
-JC throwing a dirt ball to Cooley
-JC over throwing ARE
-JC throwing the ball behind his receivers all the time while in route
-JC waiting for his receivers to get out of their breaks and come to a complete stop before getting the pass off
-etc. etc.

Personally I like JC. I think he has a strong arm and can get the ball down field. I'm not sure of his accuracy but he can get the ball down field.

Have any of you known someone who could take a test and ace it? be the #1 person for the job, but when you put them in a real live situation they can't perform? this is how I see JC. I know the whole "stat" issue will be brought up cause everyone likes stat's. Apparently that's the measuring stick around here. but there's more to playing football then stats. Most of Gibbs1 QB's would never have stayed in the NFL. Most of his QB's were mediocre and had lower percentages then most of the other top ten teams in the league. Guess who Gibbs1 won SB's with. Guess who out classed, out performed other QB's. Maybe I'm making a case for you but I'm also trying to point out that he could have the best stats and still suck as a QB. No different then being the best QB in the league and having crappy stats.

Right now my issue is the team needs a spark. Maybe simply benching a player or two will wake up this team. I know Collins is not the answer. If he was he would be #1 QB right now. but....he does have a quick release, he does know how to get the ball out while the WR is coming out of his break, and if we are going to throw interceptions why not do it with a QB who's doing what he supposed to do with the ball then we can look at the WR's and wonder why they were not in position. Instead of wondering if it's JC's fault, the WR's fault, the O-lines fault, or the HC's fault.

I think we have too many problems as of right now. Motivation is low. Players may be trying too hard. I don't know but when I see Atlanta and Baltimore and Miami bring in new HC's and they do well and all three go into the play offs and we did not I got miffed. This year it was the New Jersey and Detroit, now I'm not saying either will make the play offs but so far the Jets have been putting up more then 20 points in their games and the Lions just kicked our asses on both sides of the ball. I know the points don't show it. This is not Zorn's first yr and we are not supposed to be trying to find an identity at this point. We are supposed to already have it. Yet the other 4 teams look better then us. So yes I'm miffed at everyone not just JC.

I went to sleep last night as happy as a clam thinking how nice it would be to have DS eat some crow and bring in Marty Schottenheimer as GM and Brian Schottenheimer as HC turning our two stud WR's into 1,000 yrd each WR's. Making Mason or Alridge or whoever a 1,000 yrd RB like he has in Jersey the last 2 yrs. I picture an offense that can score at will and a defense that creates 3 and outs constantly with sacks and interceptions. Guess what? I got to sleep fast and had a restfull night. ;)

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Paintrain;599295]Which stats are ignored from his previous 20 games? How he continually improved his completion percentage, QB rating, YPA, TD:INT ratio? Which of those stats reflects negatively on him?[/quote]

lol are you going to tell that JC having the 19th best qb rating last year = great qb? seeems about avg to me, even slightly below avg for mathematicians.

or that he ranked 19th last year in pass yds and he played every game/snap versus other qbs who didnt even play every game.

look man, i like JC but i find it annoying that JC lovers trot out his stats after he looked good against the lions and rams and ignore everything else stat related. i can clearly see where the JC bashers are coming from and why they think that way. to question or attack skins fans who dont believe in JC is just being ignorant to a fault by JC lovers.

i say this alot, JC does enough things well and poorly to give both sides ammunition to fire at each other.

go skins!!

ps those 19th ranked qb stats are Jcs best year too, just imagine where he would rank if he totaled up his career stats and compared them.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Paintrain;599295]Which stats are ignored from his previous 20 games? How he continually improved his completion percentage, QB rating, YPA, TD:INT ratio? Which of those stats reflects negatively on him?[/quote]

I'm not sure if he's refering to it or not but I kinda felt he was refering to using JC's whole 5 yrs in the league not just his last 2 yrs. I know he was not used in his what 1st and 2nd yr but you can atleast count the 2 yrs with Gibbs whether he finished the season or not.

No different then Dallas fans like to only count the 90's when refering to stats but our best yrs were in the 80's when they sucked.:)

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

I fully understand your point that stats arent everything but lets not go too far. There is no such thing as one of the best qb's with the worst stats. These things go hand in hand. During the Gibbs 1.0 years no one can argue that those teams werent more talented, better coached, and had a greater sense of motivation than the current team or any team JC has been on. It's much easier to play QB and be succesful when everyone around you is succesful.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

I think Matty should lock any thread that pop up about QBs. LOL.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Mattyk72;599266]I'd love to see some stats picked apart from other QBs so we can see who else is not really "elite".

By the way I never said he was elite or even great, just good, and better than some are willing to give him credit for, that's all.

And again, ultimately my argument on all of this is our problems run much deeper than JC.[/quote]

Its hard to make an arugment for any QB that had the melt down from last year and whats happened so far this year. JC has had his problems and tie that in and JC will not really get any break until we start winning. He may get a break if the O starts putting up some points but I have a hard time getting past what I have seen so far this year and last. No its not all his fault but as the QB alot of blame falls on him.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Some of you guys and gals are morons. You must be watching these games with blinders or drunk. The Red Zone offense and the defense is the problem. Jason Campbell is doing his job. It's not his fault if he is not even getting opportunities to even make plays in the Red Zone. Most of the time Zorn is calling running plays or half back option passes. A few of the passes that Campbell have thrown have been dropped. How do you come to the conclusion that you should put in a 38 year old career backup. Zorn needs to take off the shackles and allow Campbell make plays, call audibles at the line, run hurry-up offense to change the pace. The offense is too simple and predictable.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=SBXVII;599306]I know the whole "stat" issue will be brought up cause everyone likes stat's. Apparently that's the measuring stick around here. but there's more to playing football then stats. Most of Gibbs1 QB's would never have stayed in the NFL. Most of his QB's were mediocre and had lower percentages then most of the other top ten teams in the league. Guess who Gibbs1 won SB's with. Guess who out classed, out performed other QB's. [B]Maybe I'm making a case for you but I'm also trying to point out that he could have the best stats and still suck as a QB. No different then being the best QB in the league and having crappy stats.[/B] [/quote]These things can never, ever happen.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=SBXVII;599306]DMV, I have agreed with you on many of topics in the past, but honestly I think I found one I can say I disagree with you on.

[B][I]People say he doesn't have a quick release.[/I][/B]
It's not just us fans friend it's Zorn also. He has stated JC needs to get the ball out faster. One would think the designer of the master scheme would know best. [/quote]
Zorn has also stated he's gotten much better and faster with his release.
[quote=SBXVII]
[B][I]You can't have a quick release when no one is open.[/I][/B]
I actually believe this is Hixon's fault. He's a failure at WR coach.

[B][I]JC can't read defenses.[/I][/B]
I'll believe this until I'm dead. Maybe it's because he's under center and can't survey the field as well but he seems to change into the wrong play way to many times. In shot gun he's not as bad. [/quote]
Please define "can't read defenses". Typically someone who cannot read defenses throws a high number of interceptions (see Patrick Ramsey) because he's throwing into coverages. How do we know that he changes into the wrong play too many times? If anything, Zorn has praised him for checking into and out of plays when the defense calls for it. His major error was checking to the run on 3rd and 7 vs. NYG but that's one occurence, please cite some others.
[quote=SBXVII]
[B][I]He lead his team to a national championship in college. [/I][/B]
I credit him for this. I have supported him all the way up until last week. [I][U]I am now thinking he never would have been drafted had we not picked him up. If JC and Daniels both came out of the same draft we would have cut JC, I have no doubt. Right now we have too much invested in him to simply cut him. [/U][/I][/quote]
WHAT?? So a player that was projected to be a low 1st or high 2nd round pick now wouldn't have been drafted AT ALL??? Seriously? C'mon dude, bring a logical premise to the table. The lack of credibility around here with some posts is astounding. It really indicates that some people actually know NOTHING about football.
[quote=SBXVII]
[B][I]-Thomas drops a TD pass
-Sellers drops a TD pass
-Zorn calls a HB option play
-We try to run the ball in at the goal line on 2 separate occasions
-Moss fumbles in the redzone[/I][/B]
I don't think any one would disagree with you on the fact that other players are not doing their part, but that's only half the truth.
-JC over throwing Kelly
-JC throwing a dirt ball to Cooley
-JC over throwing ARE
-JC throwing the ball behind his receivers all the time while in route
-JC waiting for his receivers to get out of their breaks and come to a complete stop before getting the pass off
-etc. etc.
[/quote]Show me a QB that hasn't over or under thrown multiple over the span of a few games. Campbell has his flaws, mechanics and accuracy are among them, but you have to take the balance.
[quote=SBXVII]
Personally I like JC. I think he has a strong arm and can get the ball down field. I'm not sure of his accuracy but he can get the ball down field.

Have any of you known someone who could take a test and ace it? be the #1 person for the job, but when you put them in a real live situation they can't perform? this is how I see JC. I know the whole "stat" issue will be brought up cause everyone likes stat's. Apparently that's the measuring stick around here. but there's more to playing football then stats. Most of Gibbs1 QB's would never have stayed in the NFL. Most of his QB's were mediocre and had lower percentages then most of the other top ten teams in the league. Guess who Gibbs1 won SB's with. Guess who out classed, out performed other QB's. Maybe I'm making a case for you but I'm also trying to point out that he could have the best stats and still [B]suck as a QB[/B]. No different then being the best QB in the league and having crappy stats.
[/quote]
Ok, who would you consider to be Campbell's peers in the league? He's not at the level of Manning, Brees, Brady, etc. nor is he at the depth of Russell, Quinn, Leftwich. So who would you compare him to on the same plane?
[quote=SBXVII]
Right now my issue is the team needs a spark. Maybe simply benching a player or two will wake up this team. I know Collins is not the answer. If he was he would be #1 QB right now. but....he does have a quick release, he does know how to get the ball out while the WR is coming out of his break, and if we are going to throw interceptions why not do it with a QB who's doing what he supposed to do with the ball then we can look at the WR's and wonder why they were not in position. Instead of wondering if it's JC's fault, the WR's fault, the O-lines fault, or the HC's fault.

I think we have too many problems as of right now. Motivation is low. Players may be trying too hard. I don't know but when I see Atlanta and Baltimore and Miami bring in new HC's and they do well and all three go into the play offs and we did not I got miffed. This year it was the New Jersey and Detroit, now I'm not saying either will make the play offs but so far the Jets have been putting up more then 20 points in their games and the Lions just kicked our asses on both sides of the ball. I know the points don't show it. This is not Zorn's first yr and we are not supposed to be trying to find an identity at this point. We are supposed to already have it. Yet the other 4 teams look better then us. So yes I'm miffed at everyone not just JC.

I went to sleep last night as happy as a clam thinking how nice it would be to have DS eat some crow and bring in Marty Schottenheimer as GM and Brian Schottenheimer as HC turning our two stud WR's into 1,000 yrd each WR's. Making Mason or Alridge or whoever a 1,000 yrd RB like he has in Jersey the last 2 yrs. I picture an offense that can score at will and a defense that creates 3 and outs constantly with sacks and interceptions. Guess what? I got to sleep fast and had a restfull night. ;)[/quote]

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=over the mountain;599293]JC played very well against the lions, he played well against the rams and did not play well against the giants.

JC's stats are in line for him to set career marks but lets not ignore JC's past stats and claim the 3 games of stats he has this year (with a huge portion of positive stats coming against the lions, rams and last 2 mins against the giants) should end all talk of JC not being more than a serviceable decent qb.

we can talk stats at the middle or end of the year; it was the lions, the freakin LIONS, and the JC lovers trot his stat sheet out like they have the cure to cancer.

let see how he looks at seasons end and talk stats. taking one or two games now and ignoring his past 20+ games doesnt seem genuine to me is your a stat lover. seems too selective to focus on one segment of numbers (3 games) and one portion of stats and not comparing them to the whole.

if the JC lovers can start this thread as an end all to the qb debate after he looked great against the lions can the JC bashers start a thread calling for his release after he looks crappy against a top 5 defense? i'd say no to both.

i dont understand either party here. he throws 1 td pass = hallelujah i told them guys JC is our man . . . he throws 1 int = gosh dangit this team is going nowhere with JC at the helm.

go skins!!

ps - this comes off as an "i told you so" thread, i dont want to hear any complaining when JC has a bad game and the JC bashers make their own thread.[/quote]

That was an absoluty brilliant post. I like your objective observations on the whole QB controversy.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=over the mountain;599309]lol are you going to tell that JC having the 19th best qb rating last year = great qb? seeems about avg to me, even slightly below avg for mathematicians.

or that he ranked 19th last year in pass yds and he played every game/snap versus other qbs who didnt even play every game.

look man, i like JC but i find it annoying that JC lovers trot out his stats after he looked good against the lions and rams and ignore everything else stat related. i can clearly see where the JC bashers are coming from and why they think that way. to question or attack skins fans who dont believe in JC is just being ignorant to a fault by JC lovers.

i say this alot, JC does enough things well and poorly to give both sides ammunition to fire at each other.

go skins!!

ps those 19th ranked qb stats are Jcs best year too, just imagine where he would rank if he totaled up his career stats and compared them.[/quote]If you feel there's a statistical angle that reflects negatively on Jason, you should try to bring it up using specific evidence so we can move the thread in an intelligent manner.

If all you're saying is that the statistics say that Jason Campbell, in the Redskins offense, prior to this year has ranked in the 15-20 range among quarterbacks, well, yeah, I'd say that's 100% correct. If you're interpreting that as he can't be trusted with a bigger role, well, please tell us why.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Campbell's numbers don't lie but neither does the score board.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Paintrain;599288]Since you use size to emphasize points you deem important I figured I'd follow your path. Obviously you don't understand the nature of the WCO. The WCO is built on short passes and RAC/YAC. That is the entire premise of the WCO. If you see the WCO tree we are a direct branch of, Walsh (short passes and YAC) to Holmgren (short passes and YAC) to Zorn (short passes and YAC). It's really hard to take you seriously when your logic is so fundamentally flawed.

I have never seen anyone on this board call JC an elite or great QB, but the other spectrum has been amazing. To read it around here and other places, you'd think he's the second coming of Heath Shuler.


I'm pretty sure Carolina, St. Louis, SF, Oakland, Cleveland, Buffalo and TB would consider him an immediate upgrade to what they have. Which brings up another point. If Campbell leaves next year, who do you propose becomes the starter? Please spare me with the injured 3rd stringer who barely held onto his roster spot thanks to the aforementioned injury.[/quote]

Paintrain (and whoever else thinks that I'm sayin JC is THE problem). I AM NOT!

I was responding to Matty's point that JC has turned over a new leaf and is not just throwing short passes. I was refuting that (with a little bit of statistical anaylsis, b/c its a slow day at work) and trying to prove that he STILL throws short passes to account for most of his production. He's playing within the WCO system. Thats what is expected of him...that's fine.

However while playing within the system in a WCO, ur completion percentages will go up b/c u aren't taking as many risks. Because of this, I was just rationalizing why JC was ranked so high in completion percentages and yards compared to elite QB's, even though our offense has disproportionately played so poorly (especially at scoring TD's).

I don't need you or anyone else to explain to me the concept of a WCO...btw u glaringly left out one basic principle of the WCO. Dominate Time of Possession, which the skins have not in our two losses. (A possible reason why our defense has underperformed)