Redskins vs. Steelers Game Thread

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

Well no matter how you look you don't want to look at the stats page and see 1/7 with 10 yards, whether it's your fault or not.

1/7 is not the same as 5/35. It's an irrelevant sample size. When that's all you have, you pretty much have to trust your eyes--imperfect as that may be.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

1/7 is not the same as 5/35. It's an irrelevant sample size. When that's all you have, you pretty much have to trust your eyes--imperfect as that may be.

nay and 5/35 isn't 10/70 either you know

there were circumstances but what's the best he could've pulled from that.. 4/7 aka 57pct or so?

i guess he needs his reps.. and I think that zorn is messing up by not giving them to him

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

nay and 5/35 isn't 10/70 either you know

there were circumstances but what's the best he could've pulled from that.. 4/7 aka 57pct or so?

True.

By the end of the week 3 game, we'll have something substantial to say about Campbell's development. Even then it won't be much, but we'll be able to say "he looks better" or "he doesn't look any better".

Until then, his performance is more or less an expected constant, in my eyes at least.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

True.

By the end of the week 3 game, we'll have something substantial to say about Campbell's development. Even then it won't be much, but we'll be able to say "he looks better" or "he doesn't look any better".

Until then, his performance is more or less an expected constant, in my eyes at least.

I'd like to see him for about a half in at least the last game.. if not the next 2

[GusFrerotte]

THing is JC should be given some comeptition to raise his game. Why is the guy untouchable? He is not a Manning brother, Roethlisberger, Brady, McNabb, etc. He is average at best and the winning percentage of our team reflects this. It was Collins that came in when JC was hurt, went undefeated and got us in the playoffs. It is debatable at best if JC could have done the same.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by GusFrerotte

THing is JC should be given some comeptition to raise his game. Why is the guy untouchable? He is not a Manning brother, Roethlisberger, Brady, McNabb, etc. He is average at best and the winning percentage of our team reflects this. It was Collins that came in when JC was hurt, went undefeated and got us in the playoffs. It is debatable at best if JC could have done the same.

He's untouchable because we have two guys who have never taken an NFL snap, and a 38 year old in a relatively foreign offense behind him.

We always had strong QB depth in the Ramsey days, but if we released all of our QBs tomorrow, only Campbell would be employed next week.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

He's untouchable because we have two guys who have never taken an NFL snap, and a 38 year old in a relatively foreign offense behind him.

We always had strong QB depth in the Ramsey days, but if we released all of our QBs tomorrow, only Campbell would be employed next week.

who do you see going for campbell at the moment? think he'd be a guaranteed starter?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

who do you see going for campbell at the moment? think he'd be a guaranteed starter?

Well, no, in this hypothetical he'd simply sign with someone who has an injury at quarterback. He's got starter potential, but he doesn't yet have starter value. In Jim Zorn's offense, he's a valuable quarterback. In a different offense, he's pretty replacable.

Think Byron Leftwich in 2007. In Jacksonville, he was a relative star. He lost a QB battle, got released, and was signed by Atlanta a week later. He was awful in Atlanta that year, but not at all because he was a bad quarterback.

In 2009, he's an NFL starting quarterback again, but he's lost the QB of future label for the rest of his career. Because of what happened in Jacksonville, he's now a journeyman. And it's not like he did anything wrong, necessarily. The team just thought Garrard was better.

[GusFrerotte]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

He's untouchable because we have two guys who have never taken an NFL snap, and a 38 year old in a relatively foreign offense behind him.

We always had strong QB depth in the Ramsey days, but if we released all of our QBs tomorrow, only Campbell would be employed next week.

Yeah, but we are not going to get anywhere with JC. We will always hover around .500 ball. And as for the Ramsey days? Shane Matthews and Danny Wuerffel? Strong QB depth my ass!!!!

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

nay and 5/35 isn't 10/70 either you know

there were circumstances but what's the best he could've pulled from that.. 4/7 aka 57pct or so?

i guess he needs his reps.. and I think that zorn is messing up by not giving them to him

I don't know if he needs reps, but we wasted reps by throwing two well-covered deep balls in a preseason game.

Given the penalties, the best he could have done was about 3/7 for 25-30 yards. The fact that he didn't execute perfectly on a play or two, plus a deep ball that wasn't perfectly thrown, doesn't bother me at all.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I don't know if he needs reps, but we wasted reps by throwing two well-covered deep balls in a preseason game.

Given the penalties, the best he could have done was about 3/7 for 25-30 yards. The fact that he didn't execute perfectly on a play or two, plus a deep ball that wasn't perfectly thrown, doesn't bother me at all.

I liked the first play call... but yes it was well covered and jason campbell either by design or whatever didn't think about throwing anything BUT that ball, kind of hard to say what could have been, so we can only work with the reality

even if he went 6/7 on the next 7 we'd still be looking at 7/14, I don't know.. I need to see more chemistry between him and the receivers

[stu_nna]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

I liked the first play call... but yes it was well covered and jason campbell either by design or whatever didn't think about throwing anything BUT that ball, kind of hard to say what could have been, so we can only work with the reality

even if he went 6/7 on the next 7 we'd still be looking at 7/14, I don't know.. I need to see more chemistry between him and the receivers

It seemed that throw was decided at the moment of the snap.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by stu_nna

It seemed that throw was decided at the moment of the snap.

Maybe. But on that first play I thought Kelly was open for a big gainer. JC threw the ball poorly, the defense caught up with Kelly, and Kelly couldn't reach it. I thought that play was a potential td until the errant pass. IMO.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

I liked the first play call... but yes it was well covered and jason campbell either by design or whatever didn't think about throwing anything BUT that ball, kind of hard to say what could have been, so we can only work with the reality

even if he went 6/7 on the next 7 we'd still be looking at 7/14, I don't know.. I need to see more chemistry between him and the receivers

It was worth it, if only to see Kelly's deep ball ability. The second deep ball went to Moss, and while it wasn't well thrown, I don't see exactly what Zorn was looking to accomplish on that play.

Considering he came back and ran the ball on the next down, I just don't get it. Are we trying to get in 3rd and long?

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

It was worth it, if only to see Kelly's deep ball ability. The second deep ball went to Moss, and while it wasn't well thrown, I don't see exactly what Zorn was looking to accomplish on that play.

Considering he came back and ran the ball on the next down, I just don't get it. Are we trying to get in 3rd and long?

Definitely and yeah not sure why again.. and for the play calling unless it was strictly to just see what was there and nothing more

I'm suspect of Zorn's play calling as it is though