Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=warriorzpath;599871]The Patriots are Tom Brady's team, so if the team sucks then guess what - Tom Brady is sucking this season too. Because he is the leader of that team. New Orleans is kicking ass this season and guess what - Brees is also kicking ass this season.

It all starts with the quarterback. Everyone else can make it as complicated as taxes and rocket science, but it's simple. Foremost, on-the-field performance: the responsibility belongs to the quarterback.[/quote]

I'm getting tired of making the same points, but the main reason the Patriots don't look like the dominant team of previous seasons is because their defense is not nearly what it used to be. And Brees kicked ass in 2007, but the Saint went 7-9.

If the quarterback is the only player that matters, why are there 52 other guys on the roster? If it was as simple as picking the perfect quarterback, you wouldn't have head coaches putting in 90 hour weeks, or month long training camps to whip 90ish guys into shape to fill out 53 spots. Your oversimplification of the game of football is ridiculous to say the least.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Rajmahal33;599893]I have to agree with you on the Brees point...and what kills me was that he was available for Dannyboy to make a move for him way back when. I was one of the ppl who was screaming for the skins to go after him.

I don't get how danny boy spends so much money on other positions and hasn't really thrown much at the QB position except maybe Brad Johnson (i don't count Jeff George or Mark Brunell cuz they were in the twilight of their careers)

I think coming into this debate, i was close to neutral on JC and leaning towards letting him finish out the season as the starter and see what he can do...During the course of the debate and seeing how rabidly ppl are defending him & attackign him (with stats, intangibles, empirical data) one thing seems very apparent to me. That is, that JC seems to be a very polarizing figure. That's a pretty telling thing to me. It tells me that a house divided against itself can never stand. It tells me that, though they may not say it publicly, I'm sure plenty of ppl in the organization and the locker room are having this same debate (perhaps in their heads). To me, that's a nightmare and the worst thing to happen to a team. [B]If they can't trust their leader on the field, then the leader needs to end that debate immediately[/B] or go.

[B]I really want JC to do well and prove me wrong[/B], but unfortunately I'm thinking he isnt going to end this debate by the bye week and probably not by the end of the season. I'm thinking at the end of the season it might be time for us to find ourselves a new leader.[/quote]


You know I was with you with just observing and seeing how he played, too. It's good to know that someone else is thinking along the same lines as me as far as seeing how this team needs to be led by the quarterback. I just want Campbell to just lead this team and take it to where he wants to go. This team is just crying for a leader - especially now.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Southpaw;599904]I'm getting tired of making the same points, but the main reason the Patriots don't look like the dominant team of previous seasons is because their defense is not nearly what it used to be. And Brees kicked ass in 2007, but the Saint went 7-9.

If the quarterback is the only player that matters, why are there 52 other guys on the roster? If it was as simple as picking the perfect quarterback, you wouldn't have head coaches putting in 90 hour weeks, or month long training camps to whip 90ish guys into shape to fill out 53 spots. Your oversimplification of the game of football is ridiculous to say the least.[/quote]

Who is the Saints defensive coordinator?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;599892]I thought it was funny in the indy arizona game that arizona fans were booing the defending NFC Champions.[/quote]

I would take a lost to Indy before a lost to Detroit though. All these people on here going off on JC. People were asking for Cutler. But let me make this point. Denver had one of the most explosive offenses last year. Did they make the playoffs? What was their record. You can have all the offense in the world. But if your not stopping anyone on defense it doesn't matter. Only exception to the rule was the Rams when the were "the greatest show on turf". Peyton didn't win until he had a decent defense. When his defense was ineffective didn't they drop off last year? Brady had a decent defense. Big Ben has a good defense. Just think about it for a second. Even if JC plays lights out. If our defense isn't producing we will still come up short. Our defense needs to improve and our offense. But I am simply tired of the JC bashing. Get over it.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Southpaw;599904]I'm getting tired of making the same points, but the main reason the Patriots don't look like the dominant team of previous seasons is because their defense is not nearly what it used to be. And Brees kicked ass in 2007, but the Saint went 7-9.

If the quarterback is the only player that matters, why are there 52 other guys on the roster? If it was as simple as picking the perfect quarterback, you wouldn't have head coaches putting in 90 hour weeks, or month long training camps to whip 90ish guys into shape to fill out 53 spots. Your oversimplification of the game of football is ridiculous to say the least.[/quote]

Quarterback is not the only position that matters, but it's the most important. And traditionally the assumed leader of the team. It is especially important with a team like the redskins; a team that has no other leader in sight.

Even if Brady and Brees plays well, if their team consistently doesn't do well then it reflects on the quarterback (fair or unfair). Brees was the leader of New Orleans in 2007 when they went 7-9, so Brees didn't do so well in 2007 in my eyes.

Part of the quarterback's job is to not only throw the ball well, but also makes sure that everyone else is doing their job. That's what a leader is supposed to.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=warriorzpath;599925]Quarterback is not the only position that matters, but it's the most important. And traditionally the assumed leader of the team. It is especially important with a team like the redskins; a team that has no other leader in sight.

Even if the Brady and Brees plays well, if their team consistently doesn't do well then it reflects on the quarterback (fair or unfair). Brees was the leader of New Orleans in 2007 when they went 7-9, so Brees didn't do so well in 2007 in my eyes.

Part of the quarterback's job is to not only throw the ball well, but also makes sure that everyone else is doing their job. That's what a leader is supposed to.[/quote]

Kinda feel like your are contradicting yourselves on a few of your points.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;599928]Kinda feel like your are contradicting yourselves on a few of your points.[/quote]

Maybe. but most important point- the quarterback is the assumed leader; campbell is not leading the redskins.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

If we had signed Drew Brees we wouldn't have been in this mess. All we would be talking about now is weather Brees would throw 5 or 10 touchdowns on Sunday. Then again the whole league is thinking the same thing.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Leader or not. He can't make the plays for his team mates. I think its more of a reflection of the team than JC. Leadership is important. But if you are leading a group into a war they might be pumped up but that still doens't mean they wont get their ass kicked if the other side has a better plan (defensive scheme/offensive game plan) and your team is outsmarted. I think this whole thought is a little cliche'.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;599932]Leader or not. He can't make the plays for his team mates. I think its more of a reflection of the team than JC. Leadership is important. But if you are leading a group into a war they might be pumped up but that still doens't mean they wont get their ass kicked if the other side has a better plan (defensive scheme/offensive game plan) and your team is outsmarted. I think this whole thought is a little cliche'.[/quote]

No, it's not cliche - it's the one of the most important things in football.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;599931]If we had signed Drew Brees we wouldn't have been in this mess. All we would be talking about now is weather Brees would throw 5 or 10 touchdowns on Sunday. Then again the whole league is thinking the same thing.[/quote]

Why didn't the Saints have a winning season last year if that is the case? They were good on offense last year. But I think the difference is Gregg Williams. If not they would have been in the playoffs last year.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=warriorzpath;599934]No, it's not cliche - it's the one of th most important things in football.[/quote]

Try this one.

Defense wins championships.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;599938]Try this one.

Defense wins championships.[/quote]

But you have to get to the championship game first and you have to be led there.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;599936]Why didn't the Saints have a winning season last year if that is the case? They were good on offens elast year. But I think the difference is Gregg Williams. If not they would have been in the playoffs last year.[/quote]

Well it's certainly not on Drew Brees.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;599944]Well it's certainly not on Drew Brees.[/quote]:doh:

Your making my point.

The point was if we had Brees with our defense he would not yield the same results he is having this year. He was good on offense last year. He was a leader. Do you see how vocal he is before the game with their "300" chant. Getting them pumped up for the game? They still had a losing record. We even beat them last year. Enter Gregg Williams. They are winning now. Undefeated last time I checked.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=warriorzpath;599941]But you have to get to the championship game first and you have to be led there.[/quote]

Exactly and Defense is needed for that.

Example: NE in the Superbowl against the Giants.

NE had a high powered offense. They set records. But they also had a decent defense. Denver had a high powered offense with Cutler and no defense. Did they make the playoffs.

You need a defense to get you to the championship game. Because no matter how much you score you have to stop the other team from scoring also. The offense cn alwyas have a bad game.

name one team that made it to the Superbowl without a good defense.

The only exception to the rule I will say again is the Warner led Rams. Even Arizona had a decent defense last year.

I'll be waiting..

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'm sure the insanity of your post has already been picked apart, but the stats you mention don't really mean much of anything. You're talking fantasy football stats, not real stats. The if you've watched the games, the vast majority of JC's production has come when we are behind late in the game and opposing defenses are playing prevent.

Of the quarteracks you mention with lower QB ratings than Campbell, not a single sane person would take Campbell over any of them. Nothing Campbell has shown me this year changes my opinion of him - he's the best QB on our roster, but he holds on to the ball too long, makes poor decions, can't get it done when it counts, and doesn't have the "it" factor you need in a franchise QB.

I garauntee by the end of the season, you and everyone who has made excuses for Campbell over the past several years will be regretting that we werent able to land Cutler or Sanchez in the offseason. I said it before and I'll restate it now - both of those guys are better than any QBs that will be available in the draft in 2010. I love Orakpo, but he's never going to single-handedly lead this team to the playoffs, which is something Cutler and Sanchez will be doing for their respective teams for years to come.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;599953]Exactly and Defense is needed for that.

Example: NE in the Superbowl against the Giants.

NE had a high powered offense. They set records. But they also had a decent defense. Denver had a high powered offense with Cutler and no defense. Did they make the playoffs.

You need a defense to get you to the championship game. Because no matter how much you score you have to stop the other team from scoring also. The offense cn alwyas have a bad game.

name one team that made it to the Superbowl without a good defense.

The only exception to the rule I will say again is the Warner led Rams. Even Arizona had a decent defense last year.

I'll be waiting..[/quote]

Rothleisberger was still the leader of the Steelers and warner of the cardinals. Without the leadership of these 2, I doubt they would have made it that far.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=warriorzpath;599955]Rothleisberger was still the leader of the Steelers and warner of the cardinals. Without the leadership of these 2, I doubt they would have made it that far.[/quote]

the question I asked was. What team goes to the championship without a good defense?..


im waiting....

[in the meantime]
Let me add to what you said. They could be the greatest leaders in football history. But if Pittsburgh didn't have their D they would be average. The most valuable player on their defense is out. Did they just lose to the Bengals?

I think simplifying it down to leadership is a bit trivial.

If they didn't have Fitzgerald and a good defense do you think they would have made it to the Superbowl. Fitzgerald put on a awesome performance during the playoffs. Their D picked Carolina apart...

Im still wiating on my answer..

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;599950]:doh:

Your making my point.

The point was if we had Brees with our defense he would not yield the same results he is having this year. He was good on offense last year. He was a leader. Do you see how vocal he is before the game with their "300" chant. Getting them pumped up for the game? They still had a losing record. We even beat them last year. Enter Gregg Williams. They are winning now. Undefeated last time I checked.[/quote]

Easy tiger. I was just talking about the Skins missing out on signing Brees a few years ago. Nothing less nothing more.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;599931][B]If we had signed Drew Brees we wouldn't have been in this mess[/B]. All we would be talking about now is weather Brees would throw 5 or 10 touchdowns on Sunday. Then again the whole league is thinking the same thing.[/quote]

This was the quote that I was responding to and also some of the statements by the Ravens fan...lol

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;599954]I'm sure the insanity of your post has already been picked apart, but the stats you mention don't really mean much of anything. You're talking fantasy football stats, not real stats. The if you've watched the games, the vast majority of JC's production has come when we are behind late in the game and opposing defenses are playing prevent.

Of the quarteracks you mention with lower QB ratings than Campbell, not a single sane person would take Campbell over any of them. Nothing Campbell has shown me this year changes my opinion of him - he's the best QB on our roster, but he holds on to the ball too long, makes poor decions, can't get it done when it counts, and doesn't have the "it" factor you need in a franchise QB.

I garauntee by the end of the season, you and everyone who has made excuses for Campbell over the past several years will be regretting that we werent able to land Cutler or Sanchez in the offseason. I said it before and I'll restate it now - both of those guys are better than any QBs that will be available in the draft in 2010. I love Orakpo, but he's never going to single-handedly lead this team to the playoffs, which is something Cutler and Sanchez will be doing for their respective teams for years to come.[/quote]

If Sanchez was on our team at this point we wouldn't be better this year. Maybe in the future. But the defense there has improved signifigantly. Cutler had a high powered offense in Denver. But did they make the playoffs. Its not just on the QB. There are other factors. [B]Not saying Jason isn't a factor in all this[/B]. But he is just one of [I]many factors[/I].

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

If you're not satisfied with these stats, just use Football Outsiders' stats.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=warriorzpath;599858]I never said that he was responsible for being 8-8 last year. Freaking read my posts. Dammit[/quote]

Whatever dude, I quoted your words. I have no interest in putting words in your mouth.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[url=http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb]FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | QUARTERBACKS 2009[/url]

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;599954]I love Orakpo, but he's never going to single-handedly lead this team to the playoffs, which is something Cutler and Sanchez will be doing for their respective teams for years to come.[/quote]

LOL.

Cutler and Sanchez will be single-handedly leading their teams to the playoffs for years to come? I hate to be the one to break this to you, but both of those teams have outstanding defenses.

I'm not saying Sanchez and Cutler aren't playing well or anything, but if you're really suggesting that they are the sole reason for both of those teams to make the playoffs and that they'll be consistently doing so for "years to come", all I can say is "puff-puff-give!"...

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dgack;600004]Whatever dude, I quoted your words. I have no interest in putting words in your mouth.[/quote]

DON'T Whatever me. If it was unclear what I said - I cleared up in my response. I never said that he was responsible for 2 losses last year. I was bringing up last year's record to show how different 2 games would make to a team's record. 10-6 to 8-8.

Don't fucking call me a liar.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=warriorzpath;600025]DON'T Whatever me. If it was unclear what I said - I cleared up in my response. I never said that he was responsible for 2 losses last year. I was bringing up last year's record to show how different 2 games would make to a team's record. 10-6 to 8-8.

Don't fucking call me a liar.[/quote]

Uh, yeah, okay. For someone who seems hell-bent on insisting that I didn't read your posts, aren't you going a little overboard with the outraged schtick?

Your original post was unclear, you've made it clear what you meant. I never called you a liar, simply said I was responding to the words you wrote. No need to get your knickers in a twist over it.

I think maybe you ought to take your own advice and read someone else's post and debate the words that were written, not the implications or uncommunicated intent (real or imagined).

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=warriorzpath;600025]DON'T Whatever me. If it was unclear what I said - I cleared up in my response. I never said that he was responsible for 2 losses last year. I was bringing up last year's record to show how different 2 games would make to a team's record. 10-6 to 8-8.

Don't fucking call me a liar.[/quote]

Liar, liar, liar, liar, liar......ROFL! Easy big fella!

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;599963]If Sanchez was on our team at this point we wouldn't be better this year. Maybe in the future. [B]But the defense there has improved signifigantly.[/B] Cutler had a high powered offense in Denver. But did they make the playoffs. Its not just on the QB. There are other factors. [B]Not saying Jason isn't a factor in all this[/B]. But he is just one of [I]many factors[/I].[/quote]

I have a man-crush on Rex Ryan.

Me so Rexy.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;599959]the question I asked was. What team goes to the championship without a good defense?..


im waiting....

[in the meantime]
Let me add to what you said. They could be the greatest leaders in football history. But if Pittsburgh didn't have their D they would be average. The most valuable player on their defense is out. Did they just lose to the Bengals?

I think simplifying it down to leadership is a bit trivial.

If they didn't have Fitzgerald and a good defense do you think they would have made it to the Superbowl. Fitzgerald put on a awesome performance during the playoffs. Their D picked Carolina apart...

Im still wiating on my answer..[/quote]

Talking about making someone's point. You're comparing a whole unit (the 11 defensive players) on a team to the impact of one position - quarterback.

I disregarded your question about having a good defense because I would think you need both a good defense and a good offense to make it to a championship. All I know is you NEED a leader to get there.

The questions not for you, but the redskins should be: is there a leader on this team? And is the leader being held responsible for the bad performances?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dgack;600028]Uh, yeah, okay. For someone who seems hell-bent on insisting that I didn't read your posts, aren't you going a little overboard with the outraged schtick?

Your original post was unclear, you've made it clear what you meant. I never called you a liar, simply said I was responding to the words you wrote. No need to get your knickers in a twist over it.

I think maybe you ought to take your own advice and read someone else's post and debate the words that were written, not the implications or uncommunicated intent (real or imagined).[/quote]

My problem is after I cleared up what I meant - you still insisted that I said the opposite.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=roth74va;600030]Liar, liar, liar, liar, liar......ROFL! Easy big fella![/quote]
idiotic clown. ROFL!

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=warriorzpath;600038]My problem is after I cleared up what I meant - you still insisted on the opposite.[/quote]

Yep, you're right. The problem is, was, and always shall be mine. I think we can all agree that you are clearly the superior intellect. I'm moving on.

Have a great day.

PS, feel free to reply afterwards so you can get the last word in. I won't spoil that victory for you.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dgack;600040]Yep, you're right. The problem is, was, and always shall be mine. I think we can all agree that you are clearly the superior intellect. I'm moving on.

Have a great day.

PS, feel free to reply afterwards so you can get the last word in. I won't spoil that victory for you.[/quote]

It's not about this. I am pissed that you insisted one thing after I told you the opposite.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=44Deezel;599853]Cassell was sacked more than Campbell last year, so the O-line argument falls flat. And Brady proved he could be good with mediocre talent at the skill positions. Name his WRs and RBs when he won 3 Super Bowls.

And Campbell isn't coming off a season ending knee injury. And while the stats are similar, Brady's widely considered to be struggling by his standards, while Campbell is playing the best football of his career.[/quote]1) Campbell is better than Cassel. By a lot.

2) You responded to my point above that you'd absolutely take Brady this year, injured knee, lack of confidence to plant his front foot and throw and all, so you have to live with that then. You can't point out that Brady, in the past, has been way better than he's playing now if your premise is that you'd take the current performance over Campbell.

Nobody is going to argue career Jason Campbell vs. career Tom Brady. It's silly and not relevant to anything.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;599954]I'm sure the insanity of your post has already been picked apart, but the stats you mention don't really mean much of anything. You're talking fantasy football stats, not real stats. The if you've watched the games, the vast majority of JC's production has come when we are behind late in the game and opposing defenses are playing prevent.

Of the quarteracks you mention with lower QB ratings than Campbell, not a single sane person would take Campbell over any of them. Nothing Campbell has shown me this year changes my opinion of him - he's the best QB on our roster, but he holds on to the ball too long, makes poor decions, can't get it done when it counts, and doesn't have the "it" factor you need in a franchise QB.

I garauntee by the end of the season, you and everyone who has made excuses for Campbell over the past several years will be regretting that we werent able to land Cutler or Sanchez in the offseason. I said it before and I'll restate it now - both of those guys are better than any QBs that will be available in the draft in 2010. [B]I love Orakpo, but he's never going to single-handedly lead this team to the playoffs, which is something Cutler and Sanchez will be doing for their respective teams for years to come[/B].[/quote]I don't know of any fantasy football league on the planet that uses completion percentage or quarterback rating to score it's players. Have we not played fantasy football?

If you can make an airtight statistical argument that Campbell is not getting it done when it matters (without using the 'it' cliche, because frankly, no one cares), I'll hat tip you and move on. Otherwise, you're just being a blowhard for everyone elses QB, who have not been as good as Jason Campbell this year.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;599954]I'm sure the insanity of your post has already been picked apart, but the stats you mention don't really mean much of anything. You're talking fantasy football stats, not real stats. The if you've watched the games, the vast majority of JC's production has come when we are behind late in the game and opposing defenses are playing prevent.

Of the quarteracks you mention with lower QB ratings than Campbell, not a single sane person would take Campbell over any of them. Nothing Campbell has shown me this year changes my opinion of him - he's the best QB on our roster, but he holds on to the ball too long, makes poor decions, can't get it done when it counts, and doesn't have the "it" factor you need in a franchise QB.

I garauntee by the end of the season, you and everyone who has made excuses for Campbell over the past several years will be regretting that we werent able to land Cutler or Sanchez in the offseason. I said it before and I'll restate it now - both of those guys are better than any QBs that will be available in the draft in 2010. I love Orakpo, but he's never going to single-handedly lead this team to the playoffs, which is something Cutler and Sanchez will be doing for their respective teams for years to come.[/quote]

I agree 100%...I would have traded 3 #1 picks if that's what it took to get Cutler. The teams that win consistently in this league have great QB's.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dgack;600014]LOL.

Cutler and Sanchez will be single-handedly leading their teams to the playoffs for years to come? I hate to be the one to break this to you, but both of those teams have outstanding defenses.

I'm not saying Sanchez and Cutler aren't playing well or anything, but if you're really suggesting that they are the sole reason for both of those teams to make the playoffs and that they'll be consistently doing so for "years to come", all I can say is "puff-puff-give!"...[/quote]Campbell and Cutler are in really comparable offenses this year, so we can keep the comparisons with them all year long. I don't think anyone believes that one has a decisive advantage over the other in terms of talented teammates on the offense.

Can't use win/loss because Chicago's defense is both more talented and better coached.

But if Cutler ends up at the end of the year with much better stats, we can probably conclude he's the better quarterback. If he doesn't, well, our non-move in the offseason looks, really, really good.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=celts32;600052]I agree 100%...I would have traded 3 #1 picks if that's what it took to get Cutler. The teams that win consistently in this league have great QB's.[/quote]

Okay Vinny, the jig is up, we know that's you in there.