ESPN: Clayton Expects Skins to Tender Campbell for a 1st and 3rd

[Son Of Man]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

It's pretty common for the QB to either get too much blame or too much credit. But it seems like for many here, Campbell is completely absolved of any responsibility. Yes he had poor protection but that's too often being used as a crutch (I believe) for many of the poor decisions he made. It's as if people think no QB was ever a difference maker, that all that matters is the line in front of him.

Thank you! Ben Rothlisberger and Aaron Rogers seem to be able to elevate their play with sub-par lines...why do we excuse JC's mediocrity?

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by Son Of Man

Thank you! Ben Rothlisberger and Aaron Rogers seem to be able to elevate their play with sub-par lines...why do we excuse JC's mediocrity?

Yep, and good QBs make their O lines look better. Matt Cassell was sacked relentlessly behind the same line Brady camps out behind all the time. He's a threat to beat you deep, Cassell was not. AND the O line was fine for the first 4-5 games last year. BUT, this has been re-hashed a zillion times.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

Yep, and good QBs make their O lines look better. Matt Cassell was sacked relentlessly behind the same line Brady camps out behind all the time. He's a threat to beat you deep, Cassell was not. AND the O line was fine for the first 4-5 games last year. BUT, this has been re-hashed a zillion times.

You keep saying this, but I do not think any line that allows as much pressure as Detroit got and as Tampa Bay got to be called "fine." If that performance was fine, then I'm fine with 4-12. Because that, to me, is overachieving.

The line was toast as soon as the first guy (Thomas) went down. All the Samuels injury did was allow reality to set in.

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

You keep saying this, but I do not think any line that allows as much pressure as Detroit got and as Tampa Bay got to be called "fine." If that performance was fine, then I'm fine with 4-12. Because that, to me, is overachieving.

The line was toast as soon as the first guy (Thomas) went down. All the Samuels injury did was allow reality to set in.

And I'll keep saying it. We must have been watching different games. I remember checking his sack totals after 4 games and he was in the bottom third of all starting QBs. The O line wasn't a mess until AFTER Samuels and Randy Thomas went down, AND then Campbell actually played better. He was absolutely NOT running for his life against the likes of the Lions, Bucs, Rams and friggin Chefs. BUT who's to say it wasn't Zorn's fault. The O definitely seemed to have more life after Sherm started calling plays.

I'm just saying I don't think you can blame the ineptness of the Offense early in the season against arguably some of the worst Defenses of all time on the O line. For the record, I actually think Campbell showed a lot during the second half of the season and am totally comfortable with him being the starter. I just don't think drafting a QB with the first pick should be off the table by any means. I believe the O line can still be addressed if they draft a QB with the 4th pick.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

And I'll keep saying it. We must have been watching different games. I checked his sack totals after 4 games and he was in the bottom third. The O line was a mess after Samuels went down, AND Campbell actually played better. He was absolutely NOT running for his life against the Lions, Bucs, Rams and friggin Chefs. BUT who's to say it wasn't Zorn's fault. The O definitely seemed to have more life after Sherm started calling plays.

I'm just saying I don't think you can blame the ineptness of the Offense early in the season against arguably some of the worst Defenses of all time on the O line. For the record, I actually think Campbell showed a lot during the second half of the season and am totally comfortable with him being the starter. I just don't think drafting a QB with the first pick should be off the table by any means. I believe the O line can still be addressed if they draft a QB with the 4th pick.

Well, before Samuels went down, we could block a three man rush. It hadn't reached comical yet. Doesn't mean we weren't toast at the time.

The whole idea of "the line was actually good for one-quarter of the season" is a ridiculous premise to begin with. If the point is to try to isolate a four game sample from an entire season as being indicative of a dependent players true value, you aren't going to have anything but an operative theory. There's really nothing there to suggest the line was any better then, but it was at least less injured.

Things of course didn't get really bad until we played an actual opponent that could rush the quarterback (Philly), and that's when Campbell started to run for his life -- literally. But that doesn't mean Gaines Adams (RIP), Cliff Avril, and Ryan Sims weren't exploiting match-ups that simply didn't exist for them in 15 other games.

Now, as Slingin Sammy and myself can both verify, pressure was not the primary determinant on any of Campbell's three picks in the TB game. It was, however, the primary determinant on the pick in the DET game. But more than forcing turnovers, pressure just kills the rhythm of our WCO passing game.

This was post-Samuels injury, but the Kansas City game was probably the lowpoint of my fanship with the Redskins. That team has 31 sacks in the last two seasons. That's the worst two season stretch since the statistic was recorded. Three off those 31 game in that game, and they got a game clinching forced fumble on Todd Collins. All three sacks came on a three man rush. I love Samuels as much as the next guy, but he would just have been completely out of place in that mess.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by Son Of Man

Thank you! Ben Rothlisberger and Aaron Rogers seem to be able to elevate their play with sub-par lines...why do we excuse JC's mediocrity?

The difference was the time they were given to throw. Ben and Rogers were able to complete 7 step drops. Their style is high risk high reward. Either they get sacked or a receiver breaks open and the offense gets a big completion.

JC behind our O-Line wasn't even able to complete much more then a 3 step drop. Thats the difference.

I'm not the biggest JC supporter but comparing JC to Big Ben and Rodgers because all three were frequently sacked isn't the way to go about arguing against JC.