"Jason Campbell struggles against the Steelers"

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

I just don't get the way that some purposely overlook plays that Campbell failed in. what the hell is the excuse for missing moss for 10 yards and a 3rd down conversion. it's just preseason ... please. are u all saying that he misses that because it's just preseason or maybe he just didn't get enough snaps. or maybe it was against last year's 1st ranked defense (even though the defense had nothing to do with the incompletion). lets face it, whatever it was ,there really is not an excuse for this play.

And why is this play along with his other plays this preseason meaningless? the only meaningless thing for the players in preseason is the score. When the players are in there, they compete the way they would during the season. Just look at Haynesworth, or ask Brennan or Daniels if it is meaningless. Shoot even mister anti-preseason, Portis, hurt his shoulder to prevent a defensive td in a preseason game.

1) errant/dropped pass. Much like wild pitch vs. passed ball, it's two different sets of blame for something that is exactly the same outcome. You also mention that the defense had "nothing" to do with the incompletion, but there were two Steelers defenders in close proximity to the pass.

The play is not meaningless. It's just that, a (one) play. Who cares?

2)You already know that players who aren't expected to play much in the regular season need to value the preseason, way, way more than anyone who goes into the preseason with no competition on their job. For somebody like Campbell, it's just a tune up. What he gets from it is 100x more important than what he does in it. But for third stringers like Daniel/Brennan, what they do in it is arguably more important than what they get from it.

3) The preseason has never, ever been about first string quarterbacks. This is the fatal flaw in your argument.

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

1) errant/dropped pass. Much like wild pitch vs. passed ball, it's two different sets of blame for something that is exactly the same outcome. You also mention that the defense had "nothing" to do with the incompletion, but there were two Steelers defenders in close proximity to the pass.

The play is not meaningless. It's just that, a (one) play. Who cares?

2)You already know that players who aren't expected to play much in the regular season need to value the preseason, way, way more than anyone who goes into the preseason with no competition on their job. For somebody like Campbell, it's just a tune up. What he gets from it is 100x more important than what he does in it. But for third stringers like Daniel/Brennan, what they do in it is arguably more important than what they get from it.

3) The preseason has never, ever been about first string quarterbacks. This is the fatal flaw in your argument.

Did you see Brady after his first interception in his first game back from his injury? He was pissed. And I should remind you that this was preseason and that as an understatement that he is a proven winner. If he cares about how he is performing in preseason and feels he has something to prove (even in preseason) then I think your #3 statement is definitely your fatal flaw in your argument.

And who cares? Everyone should. If campbell made a play earlier or even after this play, then yeah who cares cause he made up for it by making a good play - but he didn't. The best thing that he did for a majority of the game was throwing the ball away.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

Did you see Brady after his first interception in his first game back from his injury? He was pissed. And I should remind you that this was preseason and that as an understatement that he is a proven winner. If he cares about how he is performing in preseason and feels he has something to prove (even in preseason) then I think your #3 statement is definitely your fatal flaw in your argument.

And who cares? Everyone should. If campbell made a play earlier or even after this play, then yeah who cares cause he made up for it by making a good play - but he didn't. The best thing that he did for a majority of the game was throwing the ball away.

Good. Tom Brady, preseason hero. I like the ring to it.

Some quarterbacks haven't been picked off in this preseason, but you know, that's alright.

Either you understand the relative value of one quarter of preseason performance, or you don't. There's really no middle ground here.

[warriorzpath]

... and Brady's interception was just one meaningless preseason play - but by his reaction not meaningless to him.

You follow the lead of the leaders. Guys like Brady and Haynesworth, they are guys you follow and it certainly looks like to me, that they care how they perform on the field anytime, even in preseason.

[DBUCHANON101]

[QUOTE=warriorzpath;580398]... and Brady's interception was just one meaningless preseason play - but by his reaction not meaningless to him.

You follow the lead of the leaders. Guys like Brady and Haynesworth, they are guys you follow and it certainly looks like to me, that they care how they perform on the field anytime, even in preseason.[/QUOTE]

Because they are competitors, they want to win each time they step on that field. and the way they drive themselves even in these 'meaningless' games is one of the reasons that they are great when they do count.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

... and Brady's interception was just one meaningless preseason play - but by his reaction not meaningless to him.

You follow the lead of the leaders. Guys like Brady and Haynesworth, they are guys you follow and it certainly looks like to me, that they care how they perform on the field anytime, even in preseason.

You could probably write a book with the things you aren't considering about preseason performance, but hopefully Campbell can throw a costly interception in this game, and then totally lose it so he can show real fans like you how much he cares.

[DBUCHANON101]

In the summer months, the Redskins showed interest in Jay Cutler when Denver was shopping the disgruntled pro-bowler in early spring. After Denver’s new Head Coach, Josh McDaniels, turned down an offer from Washington that was identical to the offer made by the Chicago Bears, it was clear that other coaches and front offices were not convinced of Campbell’s future as a starting quarterback in the league.
The Redskins even showed interest in moving up in the draft to take USC’s Mark Sanchez. But the Redskins did not have the draft picks to match the Jets offer, and therefore, missed another trade opportunity to upgrade their quarterback position. This was after the Redskins approached several teams about a possible trade for Campbell, but no organization exhibited interest.
With the questions surrounding the reliability and the psyche of their quarterback, preseason is an opportunity for coaches and fans to see how Campbell will respond to the off-season mayhem.
Unfortunately, for Jason Campbell, the preseason has not pointed in the direction that he and his team were hoping.
After two preseason games, Campbell is 4/13 with 48 yards (a completion percentage of 30.8%) and has a quarterback rating of 43.1%. This puts Campbell in the No. 32 spot when compared to other starting quarterbacks’ numbers this preseason; and has Washington’s offense ranked 29th for yards, 30th for points, and 31st for passing. (By contrast, Kyle Orton’s completion percentage is 64.3% with an overall rating of 50.9%, Jay Cutler’s completion percentage is 56.5% with an overall rating of 79.1%, and Mark Sanchez has a completion rate of 50.0% with a rating of 82.3%).
There is no denying that Campbell must perform better this Friday when the Redskins travel to take on the New England Patriots. As one official in the Redskins organization remarked, “It would put a lot of peoples’ minds at ease, and I’m not just talking about the fans.”
Hopefully, for the team and Campbell, the second half of the preseason will prove to be more promising than the first. So, it appears that the need and meaningfulness of the preseason is still alive and well in Washington

[joethiesmanfan]

Interesting discussion. The season is about to begin!!!!!!! Oh yeah, an don't forget the Skins tried to sign Vick because he is better than Campbell.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by joethiesmanfan

Interesting discussion. The season is about to begin!!!!!!! Oh yeah, an don't forget the Skins tried to sign Vick because he is better than Campbell.

They also tried to talk Dilfer out of retirement...as long as we're making stuff up.

[CRedskinsRule]

last year, in the preseason "real game" we got demolished. We then started 6-2. I hope we light up the scoreboard. but its still preseason

[hooskins]

gtripp i feel like you are wasting your time and energy trying to convince those who are simply irrational or too emotional.

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by hooskins

gtripp i feel like you are wasting your time and energy trying to convince those who are simply irrational or too emotional.

He's wasting his time? gtripp says "The preseason has never, ever been about first string quarterbacks. This is the fatal flaw in your argument."

Then I give him an example of probably the most proven currently active (first string) quarterback that cares about his first preseason game as much as a regular season game, and I'm wasting my time?

I just turned this whole discussion around on gtripp on this one argument because I proved his never, ever statement untrue.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

He's wasting his time? gtripp says "The preseason has never, ever been about first string quarterbacks. This is the fatal flaw in your argument."

Then I give him an example of probably the most proven currently active (first string) quarterback that cares about his first preseason game as much as a regular season game, and I'm wasting my time?

I just turned this whole discussion around on gtripp on this one argument because I proved his never, ever statement untrue.

I feel your (counter-)argument was aimed at trying to prove an exception rather than a rule, but I'm really not even sure if it did that.

I didn't want to completely discredit your point about Brady, but I felt you were 1) comparing apples to oranges, 2) citing a particularly extreme example, and 3) maybe even proving my point in the process.

But it's possible that I just completely missed your point that quarterbacks who throw INTs in the preseason (not including our "struggling" QB who has neither been picked, nor taken a sack) should show some god damn fire when they do get picked. Because that's what's separates winners from losers. Post-interception tirades. Where's Jeff George when you need him?

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

The preseason has never, ever been about first string quarterbacks. This is the fatal flaw in your argument.

There are no exceptions to your never, ever statement. Thats why your statement is so untrue all the way around.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

There are no exceptions to your never, ever statement. Thats why your statement is so untrue all the way around.

1) I'm not convinced that their are. I'm not talking about storylines here, I could care less about those. I'm talking situations when a well entrenched first team quarterback loses his job in the preseason to simply the "next best" guy on the roster. Perhaps Chad Hutchinson in 2005 would have been a better example than Brady, but even he only became the starter because of injury, and then completely played his way out of the job. Matt Leinart last year is a more recent example, but we don't have anything comparable to Kurt Warner.

2) Perhaps I can't prove enough knowledge about the counter-examples to take such a hard-line, absolutist postition. That's fair, I think. But I'm still having a hard time citing examples where a non-quarterback battle becomes a quarterback battle based purely on preseason performance. And until a solid example emerges, then I could technically just hold my position.