Commanders Post at The Warpath  

Home | Forums | Donate | Shop




Go Back   Commanders Post at The Warpath > Commanders Football > Locker Room Main Forum

Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion


Campbell's numbers dont lie

Locker Room Main Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-05-2009, 03:58 PM   #1
DBUCHANON101
The Starter
 
DBUCHANON101's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,373
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmvskinzfan08 View Post
When I saw your Avatar title - JC equals David Garrad you lost all credibility.

To add to you trying to call me out. I watch the games and watch them closely. When JC plays bad I say he plays bad. But I am not going to sit and hate all the time and not give him credit when he has a decent game. We are level headed and know that it is a combination of things. The o-line, the running game, lack of a second WR, play calling -- all of that. We dont claim JC is Peyton Manning or the "untouchable" Brady. What we claim is people love to hate but rarely congratulate. You are a perfect example of this. So if you think JC is the only reason we are struggling you obviously are not watching the games close enough. As far as the sentence I highlighted that may be true. But in the end we won the game despite those defficiencies -- he battled back and helped us win the game. You are not a hater because you have a opinion. You are a hater because all you do is hate!!
How are they different? To this point they both have the same td's but Garrard has only thrown 1 pick. Both are 2-2. IMO Neither really is a step better than the other so id say thats a fair comparison.
__________________
But there's booze in the blender. And soon it will render. That frozen concoction that helps me hang on.
DBUCHANON101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 04:12 PM   #2
dmvskinzfan08
Impact Rookie
 
dmvskinzfan08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 968
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by DBUCHANON101 View Post
How are they different? To this point they both have the same td's but Garrard has only thrown 1 pick. Both are 2-2. IMO Neither really is a step better than the other so id say thats a fair comparison.
So they are the same because they both are 2-2? You need more to go on than just they are both are 2-2. If you said that they both didn't throw many ints the first year they were starters I would say okay. Garrard started off being more of a runner than JC was. But if the criteria above is all you have to go by. So 5td-1int is the same as 5tds-5int? You lose your credibility too. The only other thing they have in common is...

:cool-smil
__________________
HTTR 09 - RIP#21
HATERS << Misery Loves Company
dmvskinzfan08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 04:24 PM   #3
SC Skins Fan
The Starter
 
SC Skins Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,555
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmvskinzfan08 View Post
So they are the same because they both are 2-2? You need more to go on than just they are both are 2-2. If you said that they both didn't throw many ints the first year they were starters I would say okay. Garrard started off being more of a runner than JC was. But if the criteria above is all you have to go by. So 5td-1int is the same as 5tds-5int? You lose your credibility too. The only other thing they have in common is...

:cool-smil
http://www.thewarpath.net/nfl-draft-...tml#post595312
__________________
It has taken a long time, but I have finally realized that nothing I say about the Redskins will have any effect upon anything the Redskins do.
SC Skins Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 04:30 PM   #4
dmvskinzfan08
Impact Rookie
 
dmvskinzfan08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 968
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan View Post
You proved my point again. Not that you weren't a supporter of Campbell at one point in time. But by your means of comparison.

Doesn't mean I dont agree with you on some points but its just seems as though you are making JC the sole problem in this offense when it is a multitude of things.
__________________
HTTR 09 - RIP#21
HATERS << Misery Loves Company
dmvskinzfan08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 04:38 PM   #5
SC Skins Fan
The Starter
 
SC Skins Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,555
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmvskinzfan08 View Post
You proved my point again. Not that you weren't a supporter of Campbell at one point in time. But by your means of comparison.

Doesn't mean I dont agree with you on some points but its just seems as though you are making JC the sole problem in this offense when it is a multitude of things.
One the first point (bolded), I have no idea what you mean. On the second point, that is just you reading something into what I am saying that I have never said at all. The fact that Campbell is not the "answer" at quarterback and lacks the skills to be a very good/elite player at the position does not mean that he is the only problem with the offense. I have never said he was the sole problem or replacing him would represent a cure-all. I am, however, trying to be realistic in my evaluation of him as an NFL passer. I find him lacking in the essential characteristics (i.e. ability to quickly process information, play with timing/anticipation) that are necessary for consistent success at the position.
__________________
It has taken a long time, but I have finally realized that nothing I say about the Redskins will have any effect upon anything the Redskins do.
SC Skins Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 04:44 PM   #6
dmvskinzfan08
Impact Rookie
 
dmvskinzfan08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 968
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan View Post
But that is just you reading something into what I am saying that I have never said at all. The fact that Campbell is not the "answer" at quarterback and lacks the skills to be a very good/elite player at the position does not mean that he is the only problem with the offense. I have never said he was the sole problem or replacing him would represent a cure-all. I am, however, trying to be realistic in my evaluation of him as an NFL passer. I find him lacking in the essential characteristics (i.e. ability to quickly process information, play with timing/anticipation) that are necessary for consistent success at the position.
You compared him to Garrard and in the thread you posted you also compared him to Leftwich. All totally different QBs. Garrard when he became a starter was more of a running QB. Leftwich has two cement blocks for feet. Campbell is somewhere in between. But a better passer than both in this point in his career IMO. Garrard is a decent passer. But he was more of a running threat when he first started. JC can run. But rarely does.
__________________
HTTR 09 - RIP#21
HATERS << Misery Loves Company
dmvskinzfan08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 04:58 PM   #7
SC Skins Fan
The Starter
 
SC Skins Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,555
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmvskinzfan08 View Post
You compared him to Garrard and in the thread you posted you also compared him to Leftwich. All totally different QBs. Garrard when he became a starter was more of a running QB. Leftwich has two cement blocks for feet. Campbell is somewhere in between. But a better passer than both in this point in his career IMO. Garrard is a decent passer. But he was more of a running threat when he first started. JC can run. But rarely does.
In the thread referenced I actually did not compare him to Leftwich. I was responding to a comment about Leftwich and said that he is someone else who actually had (to that point) put up good statistical numbers but was not a very good quarterback and lacked a refined sense of timing and anticipation. If you read what I actually wrote it is quite clear and does not differ in tone from your characterization above.

Also, I am not sure how you can characterize Garrard as a "runner" or say that his "running" makes a comparison between he and Campbell inaccurate. In 2008 Garrard had the most rushing yards he has ever had as a professional (322). Campbell had 258. Garrard scrambles around because he does not get a clear picture at the snap or play with great timing. That is exactly the same reason that Campbell was moving so much in the pocket yesterday.
__________________
It has taken a long time, but I have finally realized that nothing I say about the Redskins will have any effect upon anything the Redskins do.
SC Skins Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 04:31 PM   #8
Ruhskins
Living Legend
 
Ruhskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 22,379
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Quote:
Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan View Post
Well at least you're not wishing for the team to do badly.
__________________
R.I.P. #21
Ruhskins is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.
Page generated in 1.08789 seconds with 11 queries