Updated: Discuss our Backup QB Situation (formerly Byron Leftwich)

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

classic example of over-exagerrating what people were saying. how does "hes good", "hes solid" or "potential to be a borderline pro-bowler" = undisputed savior?

perhaps "undisputed future" would have been a better term, but considering the run of mediocre QBs this team has had for 15 years, being a savior here wouldnt entail much more than that.

Originally Posted by 2BIG2BSKINNY

All year I watched as other teams attacked the defense down the field and we do not. JC had a decent year! Int"s down and fumbles were not a problem! If you want him to succeed let him attack the defense... even with no results then we can make a clear determination of the ability of JC as starting QB!

At least we would know what we have then!

I really thought when the offense got bogged down after the mid year we would go no huddle some and let jason play without thinking... Maybe we are to busy trying to plan a way to win then just going out there and doing what these players have done since they were kids...play football!

JC didnt attack defenses because JC doesnt look at his primary target. I only attended one game in person this year (Cardninals), but we had receivers open a number of times in that game and Campbell wasnt even looking at them... he consisently (as indicated in the article i quoted) stares down his check-down guy the entire time instead of looking at his primary target.

JC is also horribly timid in the red-zone. I've heard many people say he is too afraid to make a mistake. Whether thats a fault intrinsic to Campbell, lack of confidence in our receivers, or merely a result of having to learn a new offense nearly every year for the better part of the past decade, the fact remains that it seems true. campbell is unwilling to take chances. While that is one reason why he doesnt throw that many INTs, its also a reason he doesnt throw many touchdowns either.

If Campbell was 2 years younger and had 2 additional years on his contract at a low figure, i wouldnt be wanting to trade him. but the fact is, this is the last year we can realistically trade him and get something in return. Campbell hasnt shown me enough to think he's the future here.

i work in risk management, so i'll put it another way - the risk that campbell fails to become a successful west coast QB in 2009 and we have to look elsewhere for a QB FAR outweighs the risk that if we traded him for a 2nd rounder (or more); he would then go on to his new team and become a perennial pro-bowl QB and we would regret making a rash decision.

By sticking with Campbell, we are really going "all in" this year. If Campbell fails, it means not only is Campbell gone (atleast as a starter) next year, but also that Zorn and the WCO are gone too and we build from scratch again in 2010. New coach; new system; new quarterback. I would argue that sticking with Campbell puts this franchise back far more than moving him now, getting something in return, and keeping the offense in tact. On the flip side, if we were going to "blow this thing up," next year wouldnt be a bad year to do it.

[2BIG2BSKINNY]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

perhaps "undisputed future" would have been a better term, but considering the run of mediocre QBs this team has had for 15 years, being a savior here wouldnt entail much more than that.



JC didnt attack defenses because JC doesnt look at his primary target. I only attended one game in person this year (Cardninals), but we had receivers open a number of times in that game and Campbell wasnt even looking at them... he consisently (as indicated in the article i quoted) stares down his check-down guy the entire time instead of looking at his primary target.

JC is also horribly timid in the red-zone. I've heard many people say he is too afraid to make a mistake. Whether thats a fault intrinsic to Campbell, lack of confidence in our receivers, or merely a result of having to learn a new offense nearly every year for the better part of the past decade, the fact remains that it seems true. campbell is unwilling to take chances. While that is one reason why he doesnt throw that many INTs, its also a reason he doesnt throw many touchdowns either.

If Campbell was 2 years younger and had 2 additional years on his contract at a low figure, i wouldnt be wanting to trade him. but the fact is, this is the last year we can realistically trade him and get something in return. Campbell hasnt shown me enough to think he's the future here.

i work in risk management, so i'll put it another way - the risk that campbell fails to become a successful west coast QB in 2009 and we have to look elsewhere for a QB FAR outweighs the risk that if we traded him for a 2nd rounder (or more); he would then go on to his new team and become a perennial pro-bowl QB and we would regret making a rash decision.

By sticking with Campbell, we are really going "all in" this year. If Campbell fails, it means not only is Campbell gone (atleast as a starter) next year, but also that Zorn and the WCO are gone too and we build from scratch again in 2010. New coach; new system; new quarterback. I would argue that sticking with Campbell puts this franchise back far more than moving him now, getting something in return, and keeping the offense in tact. On the flip side, if we were going to "blow this thing up," next year wouldnt be a bad year to do it.

I WENT TO THE CINCY GAME AND THERE WAS NOT ONE ROUTE OVER 25 YARDS!!! This is when the Offense was not doing well. Early on in the Cards game we were very physical and were trying to hammer them with our line play. I agree that JC locks in to Santana way too much! But he has enough, if not tons more than any quarterback who led the Skins to any Superbowl... It may be the cast around him...

But I agree that this is the year that counts! Show me something JC!