Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;600053]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.

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

I think he's already better. You saw what the NFL thought of Campbell when we was dangled out there during the off season....and you saw what someone paid to get Cutler. But I hope I'm wrong.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

The bottom line is we have a middle of the pack QB and it may always be that way. It's not like we've got a situation that's in Cleveland, Oakland, Tampa Bay, Carolina or KC. I mean Cleveland just benched Quinn to go back to Anderson. I don't think it's gets any worse than that.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skinsfan69;600062]I think he's already better. You saw what the NFL thought of Campbell when we was dangled out there during the off season....and you saw what someone paid to get Cutler. But I hope I'm wrong.[/quote]That also goes the other way around. Why was Cutler available if the Broncos didn't feel like they could do better? I mean, McDaniels probably felt that Kyle Orton could win more games than Cutler, as wrongheaded as that may have seemed, Orton has been at least as good through 3 games as Cutler has.

Well, the implication is that Cutler would also pay immediate dividends to the team that got him. At this point, he's probably cost the Bears a game and won them one, so he's probably more or less exactly what Kyle Orton would have done in the same timeframe. Kyle Orton, though, would have beaten the Packers and the Bears would have been closer to winning the division title than with Cutler.

Nobody who has been better than Campbell this season ever came remotely available. Unless you count Brees in 2006...

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dgack;600054]Okay Vinny, the jig is up, we know that's you in there.[/quote]

If I were Vinny then Cutler would be starting for the Redskins. 25 year old franchise QB's don't grow on trees. I am 38 years old and the Redskins have been looking for one my whole life.

I wish I were Vinny because then I could resign and save the Redskins.

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]

I don't think anybody knew Brees would explode the way he has coming off that shoulder injury. He's just been flat out balling. See to me this is what shows how good a QB is. Is Devry Henderson, Robert Meachum, Marcus Colston, Lance Moore and Shockey any better than the guys we have??? Colston may be but that's it if you ask me. The rest of them seem like average players. Shockey is overrated. How do they move the ball the way they do with these guys??? It must be the QB, good scheme and o-line. But if you put JC in that offense they don't move the ball the way they do.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skinsfan69;600074]I don't think anybody knew Brees would explode the way he has coming off that shoulder injury. He's just been flat out balling. See to me this is what shows how good a QB is. Is Devry Henderson, Robert Meachum, Marcus Colston, Lance Moore and Shockey any better than the guys we have??? Colston may be but that's it if you ask me. The rest of them seem like average players. Shockey is overrated. How do they move the ball the way they do with these guys??? It must be the QB, good scheme and o-line. But if you put JC in that offense they don't move the ball the way they do.[/quote]I think we could make the case that no quarterback in NFL history is more accurate than Drew Brees. The guy does magical things with a football in his hands.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;600066]That also goes the other way around. Why was Cutler available if the Broncos didn't feel like they could do better? I mean, McDaniels probably felt that Kyle Orton could win more games than Cutler, as wrongheaded as that may have seemed, Orton has been at least as good through 3 games as Cutler has.

Well, the implication is that Cutler would also pay immediate dividends to the team that got him. At this point, he's probably cost the Bears a game and won them one, so he's probably more or less exactly what Kyle Orton would have done in the same timeframe. Kyle Orton, though, would have beaten the Packers and the Bears would have been closer to winning the division title than with Cutler.

Nobody who has been better than Campbell this season ever came remotely available. Unless you count Brees in 2006...[/quote]

Well that's casue McDaniels was a total dumbass and wanted his own guy and let it get out to the media. Otherwise there is no way in hell a guy like that becomes available. We're only 3 games in. Let's have this conversation again later on in the year. Over the long haul Denver is going no where with Orton IMO.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skinsfan69;600074]I don't think anybody knew Brees would explode the way he has coming off that shoulder injury. He's just been flat out balling. See to me this is what shows how good a QB is. Is Devry Henderson, Robert Meachum, Marcus Colston, Lance Moore and Shockey any better than the guys we have??? Colston may be but that's it if you ask me. The rest of them seem like average players. Shockey is overrated. How do they move the ball the way they do with these guys??? It must be the QB, good scheme and o-line. But if you put JC in that offense they don't move the ball the way they do.[/quote]

Your assuming he would not do as well.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skinsfan69;600078]Well that's casue McDaniels was a total dumbass and wanted his own guy and let it get out to the media. Otherwise there is no way in hell a guy like that becomes available. We're only 3 games in. Let's have this conversation again later on in the year. Over the long haul Denver is going no where with Orton IMO.[/quote]McDaniels probably won't look as good in Week 7 as he does in Week 3. But his big game is against New England. If he wins that one, even a 2-6 stretch in the next 8 games gives the Broncos a really good shot to win the division. And I can't believe I'm saying that because I was certain Seattle would be picking in the top 5 with Denver's first rounder.

How about the job Mike Nolan has done with that defense? Brady Quinn absolutely carved them up last year, and Nolan made him look like a green as grass rookie (as did Baltimore, but they do that to everyone).

Unlike last year (jsarno), I think Denver is completely for real.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=celts32;600067]If I were Vinny then Cutler would be starting for the Redskins. 25 year old franchise QB's don't grow on trees. I am 38 years old and the Redskins have been looking for one my whole life.

I wish I were Vinny because then I could resign and save the Redskins.[/quote]

I was referring to how casually you were willing to drop three #1 picks ;)

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. [B]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.[/B][/quote]
So what do you want, a cookie? I don't really understand why Skins fans still even care about Cutler or Sanchez in relation to Campbell. It's not like we turned down offers for them. We tried to get them, but didn't. Big deal, move on. Worry about who we have, not who we don't. The Cutler/Sanchez talk is beyond pointless.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Campbell is OK, no better. I think he's worse than his statistics. He can't hit a wide-open receiver (especially in stride.)
In the first drive of our last two games he has missed wide-open possible TDs
2 weeks ago: underthrew a wide-open Kelly, and if he can't throw that route he can't throw a fade. (I've never seen him successfully complete a fade pass. Think about how that impacts the defensive schemes inside the 20.)
Last week he threw a bad pass "at" Santana Moss at the 3. The only time I can remember him throwing to Moss in stride (no leap or adjustment necessary) Moss turned into a TD this last week.

I don't remember him throwing nice bombs, the most enjoyable play to watch in football. His passes don't allow the receivers to make plays since they have to leave their feet most of time unless it's a pattern from side to side. For these reasons the wide receivers all of a sudden got TDs with Collins.

Another question I have:
Is it Zorn or Campbell who decides that 5 pass plays in a row will go to Moss, 3 in a row to Cartwright, etc? I can't see the field in the telecast so I don't know who's open, but is Zorn calling play after play to the same receiver, or is Campbell checking down over and over to the same receiver? Is it really possible that Cooley wasn't getting open this game?

I'm starting to think that we should use Campbell outside the 20 and Collins inside the 20. Collins can throw a fade, so the other team would have to respect that near the goal-line. On the other hand, Collins's noodle arm wouldn't be as obvious in this range. It is interesting to note that in a pre-season poll, most on this board considered Campbell the weakest of the NFC East QBs and Collins the strongest of the backups.
I know it's not what is normally done, but does it hurt to give it a try?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;600049]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.[/quote]


1) So what. Someone said Brady plays behind a dominant O-line. I disagreed pointing out that Cassell was sacked more than Campbell last year. I was in no way making a comparison between Cassell and Campbell.

2) I would take Brady (and/or his performance based on whatever the hell point you're trying to make) right now regardless of your intimate conversations with him about his present confidence level, because we know what he is capable of based on his overall body of work. I also pointed out that Brady's stats, while "struggling", are still as good as or better than Campbells who is "stat-wise" playing the best football of his career. Furthermore, I have a feeling Brady's play will improve as the season goes on, which is something I can't say with any confidence about JC.

But anyway, please keep us all posted on Brady's confidence level and tell him I said hi.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=44Deezel;600173]1) So what. Someone said Brady plays behind a dominant O-line. I disagreed pointing out that Cassell was sacked more than Campbell last year. I was in no way making a comparison between Cassell and Campbell.

2) I would take Brady (and/or his performance based on whatever the hell point you're trying to make) right now regardless of your intimate conversations with him about his present confidence level, because we know what he is capable of based on his overall body of work. I also pointed out that Brady's stats, while "struggling", are still as good as or better than Campbells who is "stat-wise" playing the best football of his career. Furthermore, I have a feeling Brady's play will improve as the season goes on, which is something I can't say with any confidence about JC.

But anyway, please keep us all posted on Brady's confidence level and tell him I said hi.[/quote]1) The point I was trying to make, and I was completely unclear here, is that Cassel's sacks are an indictment more of Matt Cassel then of the Pats offensive line. The Patriots probably have a much better OL than the Redskins, though it's admittedly an apples to oranges comparision.

2) Touche. Tom and I are merely pen pals, and we like to discuss abstract concepts such as confidence in our free time. Neither of us has any free time.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skinsfan69;600074]I don't think anybody knew Brees would explode the way he has coming off that shoulder injury. He's just been flat out balling. See to me this is what shows how good a QB is. Is Devry Henderson, Robert Meachum, Marcus Colston, Lance Moore and Shockey any better than the guys we have??? Colston may be but that's it if you ask me. The rest of them seem like average players. Shockey is overrated. How do they move the ball the way they do with these guys??? It must be the QB, good scheme and o-line. But if you put JC in that offense they don't move the ball the way they do.[/quote]

The O-line was getting bumrushed by the Bills and Brees looked mediocre for a while in that game. BUT, they righted the ship and went to the running game. They're a complete offense. They struggle and still score 27.

And let's not forget about that Copper dude (Terrence?) and the other scrub WRs Brees has made look good over the last couple of years. Bad WRs is about the weakest excuse anyone can make for a QB.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Paintrain;600106]So what do you want, a cookie? I don't really understand why Skins fans still even care about Cutler or Sanchez in relation to Campbell. It's not like we turned down offers for them. We tried to get them, but didn't. Big deal, move on. Worry about who we have, not who we don't. The Cutler/Sanchez talk is beyond pointless.[/quote]

Good point. We got JC for the rest of the year. If we want to talk about the future that's fine. If you know any free agent QBs or College Qbs that will be better then let's talk about that. But even then people are assuming that JC will be gone this season. He hasn't played that bad. Its only the third game. He can only get better. I think the running game is a QB's best friend once we get that going I guarantee all you haters that our offense wil thrive. Write it down. When we get our running game together, which we will, our whole offense will thrive. Its not JC fault that we are one dimensional. He does not control the o-line or rbs performances (or WRs for that matter). Someone said he has yet to hit someone in stride. But then he turns around and says he hits moss is stride for a touchdown. He misses open receivers. [I][B]Its easy to sit on the sideline and say this and that[/B][/I]. Things happen much quicker on the feel and no QB makes the right decisions 100% of the time. We have JC for the rest of the year. So please button your pie holes about ifs and buts. Support him or shut up. Because he is our QB. My belief is that he is going to be having a lot of people eating crow by the end of the season. We just need to get this running game going.

Support your QB. He is not Delhomme and even the Panthers still have faith in him. Fickle ass fans. I tell ya!!

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=44Deezel;600176]The O-line was getting bumrushed by the Bills and Brees looked mediocre for a while in that game. BUT, they righted the ship and went to the running game. They're a complete offense. [B]They struggle and still score 27. [/B]

And let's not forget about that Copper dude (Terrence?) and the other scrub WRs Brees has made look good over the last couple of years. Bad WRs is about the weakest excuse anyone can make for a QB.[/quote]

Thats funny. We do awesome on offense and we end up lucky to score 27. When was the last time we had at least 35 points in a game? Was it the 05 game against the Cowboys at Fed Ex?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;600175]

2) Touche. Tom and I are merely pen pals, and we like to discuss abstract concepts such as confidence in our free time. Neither of us has any free time.[/quote]

Nice try Tripp.

You hate on Tom Brady and he sure as hell knows it.

Why can't you use a better comparison to JC in your scenario next time maybe use Peyton Manning for example?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=wilsowilso;600185]Nice try Tripp.

You hate on Tom Brady and he sure as hell knows it.

Why can't you use a better comparison to JC in your scenario next time maybe use Peyton Manning for example?[/quote]Tom was just joking when he said that to me. I know he was.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;600183]Thats funny. We do awesome on offense and we end up lucky to score 27. When was the last time we had at least 35 points in a game? Was it the 05 game against the Cowboys at Fed Ex?[/quote]

I found the last time we scored 30+ in a game. It was 32 against the Vikes at the end of '07. Last time we scored 35+ was 36 against the Jags in Week 4 of '06. So yes it's safe to say we have droughts in between our high scoring games.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Its funny. I am looking at the free agent QBs next year and I see nothing special. In the draft I see McCoy & Tebow. Don't know if Bradford's stock has dropped because of injury or not. There may be some sleepers but with our fans it would pretty much have to be a sure shot or we will run the next QB out of town also. Then we have Colt on IR. Those are pretty much our choices. Unless we make some type of trade. Which would have to be for picks and that would leave us with less picks to get a quality OL. We really aren't in a good posiiton to make a move for a QB but anything is possible. If Bradford plays well the rest of the season I think he would be the best option for an NFL ready QB. We will see starting Saturday against Miami. So I think our best bet now is to hope Campbell pans out. If he does he still might be gone because of the front office antics this offseason and the lack of support he receives from the fans. Its also depends on who our coach is next year. Another option is Vick. Ronnie Brown will be a free agent next year. That would be a good tandem to pick up. Brown is 27 though. So he would only help us for a few years. You also have Jerrious Norwoord. I just think FO has made the situation kind of sticky. The best bet is to root for JC and hope Zorn makes him into a formidable QB by the end of the year. I think he is on his way. We jsut need to have a little more patience.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

OMG, our 30+ pts scoreless streak is almost as long as our defensive touchdownless streak. Who knew?

[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]

Good responds Southpaw. Fans must remember that football is a team sport where 11 players have to be on the same page for plays to work. I player can kill a good play by either ( penality, missed assignment , bad pass , drop ball, and fumble). The Brett Farve game winning TD vs 49ers would not have happenend if his line did not block for him, or the WR catching the ball. So many things must go right for the play to be successful.

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]

You mean like the Great Trent Dilfer and Rex Grossman lead their teams ( Ravens/Bears) to the SuperBowl.:argue:

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=celts32;600067]If I were Vinny then Cutler would be starting for the Redskins. 25 year old franchise QB's don't grow on trees. I am 38 years old and the Redskins have been looking for one my whole life.

I wish I were Vinny because then I could resign and save the Redskins.[/quote]

You said yourself we have been looking for a franchise QB and they don't grow on trees. What makes you so sure if we get rid of JC that we can find one or even draft one. I do believe we had Trent Green at 1 time as our QB and we let him go. Do you remember that? Do you remember Brad Johnson who once played for us and we let him go so we could play Jeff George? You remember those QB's Celts32 Huh? Stop whining about our QB and focus on the the O-line and Defense not getting off the field.:spank:

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;600178]Good point. We got JC for the rest of the year. If we want to talk about the future that's fine. If you know any free agent QBs or College Qbs that will be better then let's talk about that. But even then people are assuming that JC will be gone this season. He hasn't played that bad. Its only the third game. He can only get better. I think the running game is a QB's best friend once we get that going I guarantee all you haters that our offense wil thrive. Write it down. When we get our running game together, which we will, our whole offense will thrive. Its not JC fault that we are one dimensional. He does not control the o-line or rbs performances (or WRs for that matter). Someone said he has yet to hit someone in stride. But then he turns around and says he hits moss is stride for a touchdown. He misses open receivers. [I][B]Its easy to sit on the sideline and say this and that[/B][/I]. Things happen much quicker on the feel and no QB makes the right decisions 100% of the time. We have JC for the rest of the year. So please button your pie holes about ifs and buts. Support him or shut up. Because he is our QB. My belief is that he is going to be having a lot of people eating crow by the end of the season. We just need to get this running game going.

Support your QB. He is not Delhomme and even the Panthers still have faith in him. Fickle ass fans. I tell ya!![/quote]

Hey DMV, I bet if the Redskins make the palyoffs we would still have some Hatter ass fans complaining that JC needs to go.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;600190]OMG, our 30+ pts scoreless streak is almost as long as our defensive touchdownless streak. Who knew?[/quote]

Nice GTripp:food-smil

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=dmvskinzfan08;600178]Good point. We got JC for the rest of the year. If we want to talk about the future that's fine. If you know any free agent QBs or College Qbs that will be better then let's talk about that. But even then people are assuming that JC will be gone this season. He hasn't played that bad. Its only the third game. He can only get better. I think the running game is a QB's best friend once we get that going I guarantee all you haters that our offense wil thrive. Write it down. When we get our running game together, which we will, our whole offense will thrive. Its not JC fault that we are one dimensional. He does not control the o-line or rbs performances (or WRs for that matter). Someone said he has yet to hit someone in stride. But then he turns around and says he hits moss is stride for a touchdown. He misses open receivers. [I][B]Its easy to sit on the sideline and say this and that[/B][/I]. Things happen much quicker on the feel and no QB makes the right decisions 100% of the time. We have JC for the rest of the year. So please button your pie holes about ifs and buts. [B]Support him or shut up[/B]. Because he is our QB. My belief is that he is going to be having a lot of people eating crow by the end of the season. We just need to get this running game going.

Support your QB. He is not Delhomme and even the Panthers still have faith in him. Fickle ass fans. I tell ya!![/quote]


It's easy to sit on the sideline and say this and that? Umm, hello? Dumbass says what? THAT IS ALL WE DO AROUND HERE! And who the hell are you to tell people to support Campbell or shut up. Kiss my ass. Are we all supposed to sit around here and blow smoke up his ass? How gay would that be? He's the QB for a team that hasn't scored 30 points in 19 games, and he's the only guy on Offense that touches the ball on every play. Hell, 20 points would be an Offensive break-out at this point. He may not be THE problem, but he ain't the solution either.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;600190]OMG, our 30+ pts scoreless streak is almost as long as our defensive touchdownless streak. Who knew?[/quote]

oh c/mon tripp. i know you're smarter than that silly ass comment you just made. lol.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=44Deezel;600229]It's easy to sit on the sideline and say this and that? [B] Umm, hello? Dumbass says what?[/B] THAT IS ALL WE DO AROUND HERE! And who the hell are you to tell people to support Campbell or shut up. Kiss my ass. Are we all supposed to sit around here and blow smoke up his ass? How gay would that be? He's the QB for a team that hasn't scored 30 points in 19 games, and he's the only guy on Offense that touches the ball on every play. Hell, 20 points would be an Offensive break-out at this point. He may not be THE problem, but he ain't the solution either.[/quote]
please don't call dmv names, he is a very sensitive and understanding guy, and certainly doesn't deserve to be called a dumbass.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

Last time I remember seeing a Redskins defensive Touchdown off the top of my head was 2005 when Sean Taylor helped seal the deal against the Eagles. Man that was a good year.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skins89moss;600216]You said yourself we have been looking for a franchise QB and they don't grow on trees. What makes you so sure if we get rid of JC that we can find one or even draft one. I do believe we had Trent Green at 1 time as our QB and we let him go. Do you remember that? Do you remember Brad Johnson who once played for us and we let him go so we could play Jeff George? You remember those QB's Celts32 Huh? Stop whining about our QB and focus on the the O-line and Defense not getting off the field.:spank:[/quote]

And dont forget Rich Gannon who went on to win a little award called......MVP!

There are alot of other factors that go into having a successful QB. Our O-line is pathetic, and we have some young receivers that are getting better. Moss isnt a #1 guy anymore, if he is doubled up he disappears. We need our run game to get going, but with our O-line thats gonna be difficult. Zorns playcalling isnt helping, but hopefully he continues to learn on the job, and improves as the season goes along.

Again, QB is the first guy we praise after a win, and the first one we tear down after a loss. Campbell has played well so far, and looks to be improved over last year. All the talk about Cutler and Sanchez is just ridiculous at this point, it isnt gonna change anything. Im not telling anyone to shutup, but JC is our QB for the immediate future, so we gotta back him up. And those asking for Collins need to go back under your rock, thats an absurd suggestion IMO.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=GTripp0012;599597]If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it does it make a sound?[/quote]

Yes. Just cause I am not there to watch a turkey roast in the oven, doesn't mean it's not being cooked.

[quote]If Jason Campbell makes major progress in the stat sheet, and no one is there to read it, is he doing any better?[/quote]

Problem is, stat sheets don't win games. It's not MAJOR progress either. Again, I feel the need to point out his 5 fumbles that lead the league. Keep in mind, everyone shut up about Campbell when we were 6-2 last year and his "stat sheet" looked good cause there were next to no interceptions. This is a guy on pace for 16 tds. So what? Fact is, NO ONE respects Campbell's ability in the NFL for a reason, so maybe you should go talk to them and tell them about Campbell's "stats". They are playing to stop the run, and guess what, Campbell isn't stepping up to beat them. Go figure. We can NOT rely on campbell to win us games, he's just not good enough, and if he doesn't get it now, he never will.

[quote]There's a lot of reasons our offense has struggled since last year's Lions game. The offensive line has not been good and has taken plenty of blows. The running game has not been a factor. The receivers were completely lost all of last year.[/quote]

Those are just skewed excuses...when Campbell over and under throws, is it all on the wr's? Cause he was off A LOT last year.

[quote]This year, the receivers are doing a better job and I think it shows up in Campbell's overall numbers. But the total product hasn't come yet. You do have to give it more than three games if you are looking for everything to come together at once. Just a week ago, Detroit was playing like the worst team in football. After an impressive win against us, they probably aren't one of the five worst teams in football.[/quote]

Problem is, we have had more than 3 games for things to come together. He's 3 for his last 11. Not impressive! By now, Campbell should be taking charge and leading us to game winning drives. He's not, and hasn't, and likely never will.

[quote]We rank middle of the pack in offense, middle of the pack in defense, but our special teams [URL="http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamst"]have actually been pretty good[/URL]. Which is a major upgrade from last year. But progress from this point on either offense or defense will be needed to put the whole package together.[/quote]

We rank middle of the pack in offense (13th to be exact), yet only the raiders, rams (who almost and should have beat us) Browns, and Panthers have fewer points scored. That is a direct result of QB play. Just goes to show you how Campbell's numbers DO lie. The offense is doing the defense NO favors.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

imo our O line in pass protect this year has been pretty good, especially since we are not max protecting like years past.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;600260]please don't call dmv names, he is a very sensitive and understanding guy, and certainly doesn't deserve to be called a dumbass.[/quote]

He obviously doesn't know me..lol. I will let this one slide....


See Matty & SmootSmack. I am learning to ignore ignorance. lol :D

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=44Deezel;600229]It's easy to sit on the sideline and say this and that? Umm, hello? Dumbass says what? THAT IS ALL WE DO AROUND HERE! And who the hell are you to tell people to support Campbell or shut up. Kiss my ass. Are we all supposed to sit around here and blow smoke up his ass? How gay would that be? He's the QB for a team that hasn't scored 30 points in 19 games, and he's the only guy on Offense that touches the ball on every play. Hell, 20 points would be an Offensive break-out at this point. He may not be THE problem, but he ain't the solution either.[/quote]

Let me tackle this in a classy way. Who am I? A true redskins fan. Not someone who comes on the board and spews hate. I am one who supports his team. I am one who is a die hard fan and will always be. If your comments would make any sense or have any intelligence in them that would be fine. But you make general statements and usually contradict yourself. Just your reply makes you seem very ignorant and childish. I am all about defending yourself. But sir you weren't attacked. I am the king of insults. So you really dont want to go there. Trust me.

My point is. All we have is JC! We aren't going to have another QB until after the season if that happens. I could see if JC was stinking it up like Jake Delhome or like Demarcus Russell. You need to give your QB time to improve. If he had a running game and a defense and wasn't producing then fine. Place all the blame on him. But if you want to act like a 3 yr old throwing a tanturm that is fine. But your only going to drive yourself crazy for no reason. Have some level headedness about you. Your little outburst shows that you are more about emotions than analysis. You just want to hate. Steam probably is coming out of your ears in abundance.

[I]JC isn't as bad as you make him out to be[/I]. Have some faith. Be a fan and not a antagonist pessimistic imbecile. As far as my comment on supporting him or shut up. What are we going to do? Make a trade? Are we going to get another QB soon? I think the chances of that are 0 to none. [B]Some people are so blinded by hate they can't actually see that JC is improving[/B]. If you think everyone is going to be a Joe Montana, Dan Marino or Peyton Manning out the gate. Then your less intelligent than I thought.

As far as saying we are all sitting on the sidelines making comments. This is true. But some us try to speak from analysis and not just emotion. We are not the QB. We dont have defensive players blitzing us and knocking the ish out of us on plays. We don't understand the speed and other intangibles. So for someone to complain about JC not going a receiver on a specific play seems very petty. Yes we want him to be a hall of fame QB and make the correct decicion 100% of time. but that comes with game experieince. We as fans do not have any patience. Some peoplewere asking to get rid of him last year after only a few starts. They dont know what Zorn told JC. They dont know what the circumstances were. Some of the comments actually seems assinine at times. We can all criticize him. [B]But lets get to the real problem and not just hate to be hating!![/B] JC can't catch the ball. Block for himself. Or play running back. As a team we are not producing. So to place all the blame on JC is idiotic at best.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=44Deezel;600176]The O-line was getting bumrushed by the Bills and Brees looked mediocre for a while in that game. BUT, they righted the ship and went to the running game. They're a complete offense. They struggle and still score 27.

And let's not forget about that Copper dude (Terrence?) and the other scrub WRs Brees has made look good over the last couple of years. Bad WRs is about the weakest excuse anyone can make for a QB.[/quote]

Your making a good point against yourself here. They righted the ship by going to the running game. Our O-line is not producing espeically when it comes to running game. Have you seen any running game to go to?

What makes his WRs scrubs? Are you just saying that for the sake of argument. So Colston, Henderson, Meachum and all the rest of them are scrubs? No maybe they run their routes correctly and are precise when it comes to the offensive game plan. If a WR is a scrub he wont come back to the ball. He wont create any separation. He will not try to knock the ball away from a defender when their is a potential INT. he will not have awareness and be able to make a move so the QB can salvage a bad play. Like breaking off yoru route and getting open when the QB is being chased around. Brees is an outstanding QB but that doesn't mean his WR are scrubs. If they were scrubs they wouldn't be in the NFL. So why are his WRs scrubs again?

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=skins89moss;600215]You mean like the Great Trent Dilfer and Rex Grossman lead their teams ( Ravens/Bears) to the SuperBowl.:argue:[/quote]

For every Trent Dilfer Scenario (No offense, great D), there is a Kurt Warner (No Defense, great O), especially in this day and age. For Christ's sake, Elway almost did it multiple times with the Orange Broncos.

My philosophy is that neither the defense nor the offense can win you a championship outright. They need the support of each other. We have an above average defense and an under average offense. The least we can do if we aren't scoring points is to dominate time of possession. In our two losses we haven't in our one win we have.

The least JC and the offense could do is get a few first downs CONSISTENTLY through the game. What loses games are 3 and outs and such. It destroys the offenses confidence while at the same time sucking the energy out of the defense towards the ends of games. That is why JC is as integral to the D's performance in close games as he is to the O's. Next time he is moving the ball well in against a prevent D when we are behind, just remember that if our D gives up a score or can't stop their O on the next possession, it's not all their fault. At some point in that game JC and the O probably let us down by not holding on the ball for a while.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Rajmahal33;600395]
[B]The least JC and the offense could do is get a few first downs CONSISTENTLY through the game. [/B]What loses games are 3 and outs and such. It destroys the offenses confidence while at the same time sucking the energy out of the defense towards the ends of games. That is why JC is as integral to the D's performance in close games as he is to the O's. Next time he is moving the ball well in against a prevent D when we are behind, just remember that if our D gives up a score or can't stop their O on the next possession, it's not all their fault. At some point in that game JC and the O probably let us down by not holding on the ball for a while.[/quote]

It's funny that you bring that up because THAT is undoubtedly on the whole offense. There were 2 consecutive possessions last week that were 3 & outs because, on 3rd down Moss and then Cooley ran their routes a yard short of the sticks. That's unacceptable! A QB can't be expected to know if a guy is running his route at 9 or 10 yards (I believe one was like 12 or 13 and the other was around 8 (not sure)). Each Moss and Cooley were about a yard short because they didn't get deep enough on their routes. All Jason can do is deliver the football those 2 possessions ended because the receivers made mistakes.

Those two drives would have at least allowed the D more rest, as you said or, as unlikely as it sounds with this offense, they could have turned into points.

Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
 

[quote=Rajmahal33;600395]For every Trent Dilfer Scenario (No offense, great D), there is a Kurt Warner (No Defense, great O), especially in this day and age. For Christ's sake, Elway almost did it multiple times with the Orange Broncos..[/quote]

Give me another example besides Kurt Warner? Elways didn't have a defense? Not to mention T Davis was tearing up the league. But don't get me wrong. Elway is one of the greatest of all times. But are you really saying that they had no defense?

Kurt warner is the exception to the rule. But seriously name a team that won a Superbowl, besides the Rams, without having a defense.

Im waiting...