Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;623374]The key for Campbell is to get sacked less in the second half of the year than the first. If he develops a major ball-holding tendency, I don't think I'd tender him a contract. The OL is going to be bad: we know that. Just get the ball out quickly.[/quote]

Would you keep him as a back up?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Ruhskins;623406]Would you keep him as a back up?[/quote]Well, it'd probably change the tender amount. I don't think I'd have a situation where he was a non-tender (contrary to what I just said...I didn't mean literal non-tender, I meant no long term contract offer of any length), but what you can receive in a trade for a RFA is directly related to how much you're willing to pay for him.

If we tender him at the second round level, we can't expect to receive more than a fourth or best case a third for him. If we tender him at a first round level, we can probably get a second.

If he doesn't become a major ballholder, I'd be comfortable with him as our starter next year while we rebuild. If he does develop that tendency, I'd be more comfortable with him as a backup. I haven't made any conclusions yet, obviously, if he plays like he did in the Atlanta game the rest of the year, he'll end up somewhere as a starter next year.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;623374]The key for Campbell is to get sacked less in the second half of the year than the first. If he develops a major ball-holding tendency, I don't think I'd tender him a contract. The OL is going to be bad: we know that. Just get the ball out quickly.[/quote]

About frigging time they moved the pocket around. There are ways to scheme around a poor Offensive line. I've been saying it here for over a year, damnit! They finally showed it in the second half. Roll out Campbell, throw screens, run draws, etc. You can't eliminate all sacks, but what team can?

I really like the shotgun look within the 5. About damn time for that as well. Must be a Sherm thang.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Ruhskins;623406]Would you keep him as a back up?[/quote]

I would keep him, and let him compete for the starting job. Hell, give him the starting job. Don't they just have to match the best offer for him? Shouldn't be that much. Draft a QB, rebuild the O line, get some running backs and hire a new coaching staff. Campbell may come out of nowhere next year and make fools out of his detractors, myself included. Maybe we end up with 2 starting caliber QBs on the roster. Not a bad position to be in. I wouldn't let Campbell walk if it doesn't cost an arm and a leg to keep him here.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Stats are wonderful, they never lie... they will tell whatever story you want them to simply by using the ones you like and omitting the ones you don't. So they don't lie... but they are the favored tool of people who want to establish a conclusion that flies in the face of simple observation.

I observe (simply) that JC is overly cautious and hesitant (even when his line has been healthy) to make longer throws, so he checks down too quickly and throws the ball to safe outlet receivers too often, and that along with west coast short pass play calling handily accounts for his higher than expected completion percentage... This explanation seems far more plausible than suggesting he's actually among the best QB's in the league when he very plainly isn't. His completion % is also helped by the 3 or 4 sacks per game where he could have thrown it away. When you throw around 30 times a game 3 or 4 incompletions is a significant number.

He has a ponderous wind up, that leads to fumbles and jumped routes... he is not nearly as mobile as people give him credit for. He holds the ball too long, and he doesn't throw it away even when he can legally do so outside the tackles. He looks at the rush, instead of down field. He has ZERO pocket presence, he hears "footsteps" and steps into sacks while avoiding phantoms that aren't there... The line is awful, but he had these same issues in past seasons when the line was much better.

He is sorely lacking in fundamentals such at ball control when he's moving, and taking the snap. We've seen him coached to keep the ball high and tight to his chest with both hands when he drops back... But he always reverts back to one handing the ball down at his hips, gunslinger style. This significantly increases his already long wind up, and makes him an easy target for sack/fumbles. He appears to be hard to coach, or not smart enough to be coached, because he surely has had this drilled into him by now (along with all the other sloppy fundamentals he can't seem to shake)

And yes his WR core is thin, his O-line is old and patchwork... But in the past even when he has played his best he is a mediocre QB who starts slow and doesn't play well until the second half of games. At his best (so far) Physically he looks slower and less confident than the career backup behind him. Under current circumstances he of course looks even worse.

I'm talking about how he moves, how he takes snaps, how he throws and drops back, how he sets himself, how he carries the ball, how long he holds it... These are not rocket science and they will tell you a whole crap load more about Jason Campbell than any statistic can.

All of this is ignoring important aspects such as leadership among the players and on field trust with his coaches there's a rumor that they don't allow him to audible(!) and while he'll still have "automatics" or "hot reads" that says a lot about his ability to read defenses.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Cutler is looking better than ever.

4 picks is pretty bad. Gunslingers live and die by the gun. This is Cutler's 2nd terrible game and now leads the league in interceptions.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Skinny Tee;624368]Cutler is looking better than ever.

4 picks is pretty bad. Gunslingers live and die by the gun. This is Cutler's 2nd terrible game and now leads the league in interceptions.[/quote]

Make that 5 picks.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

cutler is on pace for 25 picks this year, thank god the bears fo was more retarded than ours, cutler blows!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=44Deezel;623428]I would keep him, and let him compete for the starting job. Hell, give him the starting job. Don't they just have to match the best offer for him? Shouldn't be that much. Draft a QB, rebuild the O line, get some running backs and hire a new coaching staff. Campbell may come out of nowhere next year and make fools out of his detractors, myself included. Maybe we end up with 2 starting caliber QBs on the roster. Not a bad position to be in. I wouldn't let Campbell walk if it doesn't cost an arm and a leg to keep him here.[/quote]

I really don't see the point of drafting more qb's, every year we draft one and they never play. To me just a wasted pick every year. I'll take a veteran anyday.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Zerohero;624382]I really don't see the point of drafting more qb's, every year we draft one and they never play. To me just a wasted pick every year. I'll take a veteran anyday.[/quote]

Have you seen what free agency looks like at the QB position?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Ruhskins;624385]Have you seen what free agency looks like at the QB position?[/quote]

yes... like the sahara...dry

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Thanks for continuing to prove my stance to be the right one, Jay!

[yt]LXLq1Vy4llw[/yt]

[yt]i3DSMD1b8Wc[/yt]

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

I think we can now safely say all 3 suck.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=mlmdub130;624388]yes... like the sahara...dry[/quote]

Wait until the offseason, that pool should increase with some vets becoming availible as organizations look to rebuild as well.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Mattyk72;624535]I think we can now safely say all 3 suck.[/quote]Lawl at Snyder's ability to identify a good quarterback.

Remember that since he "found" Patrick Ramsey, he's yet to discover a player who is better than Patrick Ramsey.