Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=DBUCHANON101;626591]Stats are deceiving and they can be twisted to tell whatever story you want...So lets just stick with the W's and the L's which in the end are all that really matter.[/quote]

You do realize you are totally contradicting yourself right? Wins and losses is just another stat line.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=DBUCHANON101;626650]That was the point for the ppl who put up Brady's stats and say that JC is in the same ballpark due to their similiar Comp% and yards.They leave out the TD's and W's so the stats that they provided would make the 2 seem even when like we both said can make whatever point the provider wants to make.[/quote]Don't blame the tool being used, blame the person who is doing the twisting.

If you use statistics irresponsibly to try to support a poor point rather than using them as evidence to arrive at the proper conclusion, they are worthless.

The difference between Brady, 03 and Brady, 04 can be seen in the conventional stats at PFR, but is only really, really obvious once you look deeper.

This is the Football Outsiders' QB chart for [URL="http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb2003"]2003[/URL], and this is it for [URL="http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb2004"]2004[/URL]. On the 2003 list, Brady shows up around names like Kitna, McNabb, Brad Johnson, and Testeverde, and below the luminary trancendental passer Aaron Brooks. But in 2004, in the same offense with the same quality of weaponry, he reached levels near Manning, Trent Green, Culpepper, and Favre.

The bottom line is that in 2003, Tom Brady won a super bowl without outperforming Jason Campbell (2008 version) in any meaningful way. If you had cut off the analysis right there, you couldn't make an argument that Brady was better based on anything but a hunch that he would improve.

Once you extend Brady's career past three years as a starter, you can see he turned into one of the best passers of all time. You can see it in the meticulous study he puts into every game he plays, the thing that separates him from the Jay Cutlers and Daunte Culpeppers of the world. Brady has since become a great player.

I don't know anyone who thinks that if you kept Jason Campbell in the same offense he's in now another year, he'd wind up being a top five quarterback next year. No one, myself included, has the balls to predict that. It's happened before, but players who have a fifth year swoon the way Campbell has usually end up as journeymen. For those who aren't forced out the door, you usually end up with a whole bunch of seasons that look like Campbell's 08. And you can win with that, but again, you'll have to actually put some real talent on the offense, and not expect Campbell to eventually figure out how to turn water into wine. That's not happening anytime soon.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=SmootSmack;626652]At some point, you have to stop looking at gradual progressions in various stat lines and just ask yourself "Do you trust Jason Campbell to carry the team on his back and lead them to victories?" I'm not there yet, and I think by now I should be.[/quote]Inevitably though, the answer to this question is somewhere between "yes" and "could anyone?"

It's a poor phrasing of a larger question we are no closer to answering than we were a year ago. I have all the trust in the world that if theres a game that can be won by a single quality drive at the end of the game, Jason Campbell can get us there, but it's not like our games ever come down to one offensive drive in the final four minutes.

And it's a big reason that people are so (relatively) inconclusive on Campbell. He's gone a long time here without ever having a signature moment, but all of our games seem to be decided by turnover margin, offensive line play, and whether the defense shows up. We're never in a situation where the quarterback needs to score and punting is not an option. Carolina ran out the final five minutes on us in our close game, Collins was inexplicably floundering around the next week, and every other opponent has been up comfortably in the fourth quarter on us. Including Detroit, somehow.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=SmootSmack;626652]Y'all need to learn how to use the quote feature, because this is confusing as heck to follow.

Anyhow, the best thing for the Redskins is for Campbell to take control of the QB position and lead this team because then it's one less position for us to worry about. And we can focus on OL and RB.

But after 5 years, I expect more from Campbell at this point. He's a first round draft pick that we gave up a lot for. Is it his fault we did that? No, but we did and because of that he has to live up to certain expectations. Fair or not.

[B]At some point, you have to stop looking at gradual progressions in various stat lines and just ask yourself "Do you trust Jason Campbell to carry the team on his back and lead them to victories?" I'm not there yet, and I think by now I should be.[/quote][/B]

Thats basically what it all comes down to and when you watch games like the one vs Denver and he is either missing or over throwing open wr's it makes you wonder if he can turn it on in a must score situation. This is the NFL, you arent going to have many blown coverages by the defense or 5yds of separation between your wr and the db on every play but when those scenerios do present themselves you must make those plays and from what we have seen i cant say id feel too confident in a 2 minute situation with JC under Center.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=redsk1;626568]Carson Palmer is a very good QB and no offense to JC, but JC is not in his league. You can't compare the two.[/quote]

Anyone who knows anything about football knows this. Stats are just like politicians.....they never tell the truth.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=DBUCHANON101;626864][/b]

Thats basically what it all comes down to and when you watch games like the one vs Denver and he is either missing or over throwing open wr's it makes you wonder if he can turn it on in a must score situation. This is the NFL, you arent going to have many blown coverages by the defense or 5yds of separation between your wr and the db on every play but when those scenerios do present themselves you must make those plays and from what we have seen i cant say id feel too confident in a 2 minute situation with JC under Center.[/quote]Campbell's accuracy has been spotty since the beginning of October, and I agree that NFL passers have to be accurate. When the accuracy numbers come in at the end of the year, it wouldn't shock me to see Campbell in the 16-20 range, below a lot of passers he was more accurate than last season.

I'd say that's the single biggest reason that our offense is not converting in situations that it did last year: Campbell's missing open receivers too often.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skinsfan69;626868]Anyone who knows anything about football knows this. Stats are just like politicians.....they never tell the truth.[/quote]Unless they do. Also like politicians.

Basically, you're saying, "if they disagree with what I think, then it's the evidence that's wrong, not me". Not surprising.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=SmootSmack;626652]Y'all need to learn how to use the quote feature, because this is confusing as heck to follow.

Anyhow, the best thing for the Redskins is for Campbell to take control of the QB position and lead this team because then it's one less position for us to worry about. And we can focus on OL and RB.

But after 5 years, I expect more from Campbell at this point. He's a first round draft pick that we gave up a lot for. Is it his fault we did that? No, but we did and because of that he has to live up to certain expectations. Fair or not.

[B]At some point, you have to stop looking at gradual progressions in various stat lines and just ask yourself "Do you trust Jason Campbell to carry the team on his back and lead them to victories?" I'm not there yet, and I think by now I should be.[/quote][/B]

[B]That's pretty easy. No. He can't carry us on his back cause he's not good enough. [/B]

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;626877]Unless they do. Also like politicians.

Basically, you're saying, "if they disagree with what I think, then it's the evidence that's wrong, not me". Not surprising.[/quote]

I like them too...but they lie. lol.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Sidney Rice is leading the league in recieving yards. Who the hell is he. I have said for years that a quarterback is the most important factor in recieving yards. Where ever Bret Farve goes he makes superstar recievers. Just check out this year as opposed to last year.
[url=http://www.nfl.com/players/sidneyrice/profile?id=RIC161100]Sidney Rice[/url]

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=T.O.Killa;627012]Sidney Rice is leading the league in recieving yards. Who the hell is he. I have said for years that a quarterback is the most important factor in recieving yards. Where ever Bret Farve goes he makes superstar recievers. Just check out this year as opposed to last year.
[url=http://www.nfl.com/players/sidneyrice/profile?id=RIC161100]Sidney Rice[/url][/quote]

Yeah....their (Vikings) running back is very mediocre.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Defensewins;627019]Yeah....their (Vikings) running back is very mediocre.[/quote]
Not sure I understand this response.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=T.O.Killa;627022]Not sure I understand this response.[/quote]

Probably that Peterson has something to do with reciever getting more space. thought he was there last year and Rice had nobody to throw to him. Farve definately is the factore here.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Check out the third section of this article: [url=http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles/News___Notes__Moss_Renews_Rivalry_With_Dallas_79462.jsp]News & Notes: Moss Renews Rivalry With Dallas[/url]

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;626876]I'd say that's the single biggest reason that our offense is not converting in situations that it did last year: Campbell's missing open receivers too often.[/quote]

I often agree with Tripp.

But i don't know about this one.

I would put the onus on the OL and the suspect playcalling.
I don't think JC misses any more then other QBs, but the other QBs have a greater margin for error because the have better overall teams.

I've watched too many NFC east football games to say that JC misses more open receivers then Eli, Romo or McNabb.

HTTR!

I think we're gonna get a chance to make a good assessment of JC now that it appears the OL is coming together and there is competent playcalling (except when Zorn steals a call here and there).