Colt Brennan Says He'll "Play A Ton" In The Preseason

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Here's a rule of thumb:

If you can count on one hand the number of video evidences that a commentator uses to support a trend, you HAVE to be skeptical of the validity of the trend. Have to.

Because it's insufficient proof, you are essentially saying "I'm deferring to Wilcots on this one" That's fine. That's an argument. It's not a very strong argument, and you aren't going to be able to convince anyone else that what they are seeing is wrong, but it's something.

Which is why compared to irish and nflnick, you are the anti-Campbell MVP of this thread. Don't let it go to your head. Calvin Johnson was MVP of the Lions this year.

Excellent advice!

JC threw 506 passes last year. Wilcots discussed...3. 3 out of 506. I'm convinced!

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Excellent advice!

JC threw 506 passes last year. Wilcots discussed...3. 3 out of 506. I'm convinced!

Case dismissed!

And now the court will hear the case of Facts v. Opinions.

[53Fan]

At the beginning of last year JC was accused of locking on to receivers so he was told to quickly go through his progressions and check down. Maybe he did it too much. Maybe he didn't have time to wait. Either way, I expect he'll be better this year.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

At the beginning of last year JC was accused of locking on to receivers so he was told to quickly go through his progressions and check down. Maybe he did it too much. Maybe he didn't have time to wait. Either way, I expect he'll be better this year.

Absolutely. Also, JC two years ago was a turnover machine. Perhaps Zorn's plan was:
1. learn to be careful with the football, then
2. once we've learned ball safety, open it up

In which case JC, by checking down last year, was following his coaching regarding point 1. Now we are on to point 2. Maybe.

I find it hard to believe that JC would have checked down so much if some coach somewhere wasn't leading him to think that it was a good idea, for whatever reason.

[GTripp0012]

But, why don't we actually go a step further, and break down Wilcots' breakdown.

Play 1

Campbell faces a 5 man overload rush against 6 man protection. The Redskins have the play picked up. Campbell's first read is open, so he goes to him, completing the pass and Moss is tackled short of the first down. The video shows that Moss was the correct read. Wilcots suggested that the game situation dictated that Campbell should have held the ball the extra second, and try to thread it into Randle El who was a yard short of the marker on 3 and 13.

Wilcots does not tell you that the Redskins were going to, and did go for it on fourth down. (This would hurt his argument) It's not like this is important or anything. Because getting 7 yards when you need to get 13 in two plays is sooooo useless.

For the record, Campbell's pass at the first down marker on 4th down was broken up. Randle El fell down.

Play 2

Redskins protect only 5 against a 4 man rush. Samuels is clearly beaten off the snap, and Campbell has pressure immediately.

Thrash is on a clear out route at the top of the screen. The corner turns him loose into cover two and the safety doesn't go over.

This looks terrible because Wilcots puts a #2 on Thrash before the play. But wait, Thrash was running a clear out, he doesn't even look back at the quarterback. That's not a read in the progression, he's supposed to take the safety out the play. That's his job.

Naming Thrash as the second receiver is utter bullshit from Wilcots. He's simply NOT in the progression. If Campbell had extended the play to the right side of the field, perhaps he would have hit him with a pass. Otherwise, it's clear Portis was the ONLY throw on this play. There is nothing evidence about this.

The 8 yards MOVED THE REDSKINS INTO FIELD GOAL RANGE ON THIRD AND 13. Zorn passed on a 52 yard field goal attempt for a pooch punt...which Plack put in the end zone, probably because of a curse that Campbell put on him because he was leaving the field.

Play 3

This is a designed play called by Zorn that the Giants sniffed out. ALL THREE DEEP RECEIVERS ARE ON CLEARS, AND ALL THREE ARE PROPERLY COVERED.

This was not a good call by Zorn, or at least it wasn't going to work into a zone defense. If they had caught the Giants in a blitz, it's a 40 yard TD pass. They didn't, and they didn't convert. I don't even know what Wilcots is putting on Campbell. That he should have changed the play in the huddle? That he should have drawn the Giants offsides with his cadence?

Needless to say, Wilcots' sample consists of a 3rd and 12, a 3rd and 13, and a 3rd and 17. Boy, what a freakin bum right.

Not one missed read in the entire clip. Just bad analysis from a bad analyst.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

But, why don't we actually go a step further, and break down Wilcots' breakdown.

Play 1

Campbell faces a 5 man overload rush against 6 man protection. The Redskins have the play picked up. Campbell's first read is open, so he goes to him, completing the pass and Moss is tackled short of the first down. The video shows that Moss was the correct read. Wilcots suggested that the game situation dictated that Campbell should have held the ball the extra second, and try to thread it into Randle El who was a yard short of the marker on 3 and 13.

Wilcots does not tell you that the Redskins were going to, and did go for it on fourth down. (This would hurt his argument) It's not like this is important or anything. Because getting 7 yards when you need to get 13 in two plays is sooooo useless.

For the record, Campbell's pass at the first down marker on 4th down was broken up. Randle El fell down.

Play 2

Redskins protect only 5 against a 4 man rush. Samuels is clearly beaten off the snap, and Campbell has pressure immediately.

Thrash is on a clear out route at the top of the screen. The corner turns him loose into cover two and the safety doesn't go over.

This looks terrible because Wilcots puts a #2 on Thrash before the play. But wait, Thrash was running a clear out, he doesn't even look back at the quarterback. That's not a read in the progression, he's supposed to take the safety out the play. That's his job.

Naming Thrash as the second receiver is utter bullshit from Wilcots. He's simply NOT in the progression. If Campbell had extended the play to the right side of the field, perhaps he would have hit him with a pass. Otherwise, it's clear Portis was the ONLY throw on this play. There is nothing evidence about this.

The 8 yards MOVED THE REDSKINS INTO FIELD GOAL RANGE ON THIRD AND 13. Zorn passed on a 52 yard field goal attempt for a pooch punt...which Plack put in the end zone, probably because of a curse that Campbell put on him because he was leaving the field.

Play 3

This is a designed play called by Zorn that the Giants sniffed out. ALL THREE DEEP RECEIVERS ARE ON CLEARS, AND ALL THREE ARE PROPERLY COVERED.

This was not a good call by Zorn, or at least it wasn't going to work into a zone defense. If they had caught the Giants in a blitz, it's a 40 yard TD pass. They didn't, and they didn't convert.

Needless to say, Wilcots' sample consists of a 3rd and 12, a 3rd and 13, and a 3rd and 17. Boy, what a freakin bum right.

Not one missed read in the entire clip. Just bad analysis from a bad analyst.

Outstanding analysis.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Outstanding analysis.

As usual.

[GTripp0012]

The bigger point is this: If Zorn tries to change anything that Campbell did in those plays, he's not doing his job. Zorn needs to reinforce Campbell's progress, because 2006 Campbell probably would have forced a pass or two.

Wilcots, in trying to prove Campbell played scared, gave us two great examples of his maturity. I would suggest that he probably didn't watch enough film to build a solid opinion of Campbell, but I can't prove that he simply didn't try to cherry pick the three worst plays he made, and came up with the above.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

The bigger point is this: If Zorn tries to change anything that Campbell did in those plays, he's not doing his job. Zorn needs to reinforce Campbell's progress, because 2006 Campbell probably would have forced a pass or two.

Excellent point GTripp.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

But, why don't we actually go a step further, and break down Wilcots' breakdown.

Play 1

Campbell faces a 5 man overload rush against 6 man protection. The Redskins have the play picked up. Campbell's first read is open, so he goes to him, completing the pass and Moss is tackled short of the first down. The video shows that Moss was the correct read. Wilcots suggested that the game situation dictated that Campbell should have held the ball the extra second, and try to thread it into Randle El who was a yard short of the marker on 3 and 13.

Wilcots does not tell you that the Redskins were going to, and did go for it on fourth down. (This would hurt his argument) It's not like this is important or anything. Because getting 7 yards when you need to get 13 in two plays is sooooo useless.

For the record, Campbell's pass at the first down marker on 4th down was broken up. Randle El fell down.

Play 2

Redskins protect only 5 against a 4 man rush. Samuels is clearly beaten off the snap, and Campbell has pressure immediately.

Thrash is on a clear out route at the top of the screen. The corner turns him loose into cover two and the safety doesn't go over.

This looks terrible because Wilcots puts a #2 on Thrash before the play. But wait, Thrash was running a clear out, he doesn't even look back at the quarterback. That's not a read in the progression, he's supposed to take the safety out the play. That's his job.

Naming Thrash as the second receiver is utter bullshit from Wilcots. He's simply NOT in the progression. If Campbell had extended the play to the right side of the field, perhaps he would have hit him with a pass. Otherwise, it's clear Portis was the ONLY throw on this play. There is nothing evidence about this.

The 8 yards MOVED THE REDSKINS INTO FIELD GOAL RANGE ON THIRD AND 13. Zorn passed on a 52 yard field goal attempt for a pooch punt...which Plack put in the end zone, probably because of a curse that Campbell put on him because he was leaving the field.

Play 3

This is a designed play called by Zorn that the Giants sniffed out. ALL THREE DEEP RECEIVERS ARE ON CLEARS, AND ALL THREE ARE PROPERLY COVERED.

This was not a good call by Zorn, or at least it wasn't going to work into a zone defense. If they had caught the Giants in a blitz, it's a 40 yard TD pass. They didn't, and they didn't convert. I don't even know what Wilcots is putting on Campbell. That he should have changed the play in the huddle? That he should have drawn the Giants offsides with his cadence?

Needless to say, Wilcots' sample consists of a 3rd and 12, a 3rd and 13, and a 3rd and 17. Boy, what a freakin bum right.

Not one missed read in the entire clip. Just bad analysis from a bad analyst.

Wilcots = pwned. Well done Tripp.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

But, why don't we actually go a step further, and break down Wilcots' breakdown.

Play 1

Campbell faces a 5 man overload rush against 6 man protection. The Redskins have the play picked up. Campbell's first read is open, so he goes to him, completing the pass and Moss is tackled short of the first down. The video shows that Moss was the correct read. Wilcots suggested that the game situation dictated that Campbell should have held the ball the extra second, and try to thread it into Randle El who was a yard short of the marker on 3 and 13.

Wilcots does not tell you that the Redskins were going to, and did go for it on fourth down. (This would hurt his argument) It's not like this is important or anything. Because getting 7 yards when you need to get 13 in two plays is sooooo useless.

For the record, Campbell's pass at the first down marker on 4th down was broken up. Randle El fell down.

Play 2

Redskins protect only 5 against a 4 man rush. Samuels is clearly beaten off the snap, and Campbell has pressure immediately.

Thrash is on a clear out route at the top of the screen. The corner turns him loose into cover two and the safety doesn't go over.

This looks terrible because Wilcots puts a #2 on Thrash before the play. But wait, Thrash was running a clear out, he doesn't even look back at the quarterback. That's not a read in the progression, he's supposed to take the safety out the play. That's his job.

Naming Thrash as the second receiver is utter bullshit from Wilcots. He's simply NOT in the progression. If Campbell had extended the play to the right side of the field, perhaps he would have hit him with a pass. Otherwise, it's clear Portis was the ONLY throw on this play. There is nothing evidence about this.

The 8 yards MOVED THE REDSKINS INTO FIELD GOAL RANGE ON THIRD AND 13. Zorn passed on a 52 yard field goal attempt for a pooch punt...which Plack put in the end zone, probably because of a curse that Campbell put on him because he was leaving the field.

Play 3

This is a designed play called by Zorn that the Giants sniffed out. ALL THREE DEEP RECEIVERS ARE ON CLEARS, AND ALL THREE ARE PROPERLY COVERED.

This was not a good call by Zorn, or at least it wasn't going to work into a zone defense. If they had caught the Giants in a blitz, it's a 40 yard TD pass. They didn't, and they didn't convert. I don't even know what Wilcots is putting on Campbell. That he should have changed the play in the huddle? That he should have drawn the Giants offsides with his cadence?

Needless to say, Wilcots' sample consists of a 3rd and 12, a 3rd and 13, and a 3rd and 17. Boy, what a freakin bum right.

Not one missed read in the entire clip. Just bad analysis from a bad analyst.

Excellent. Great to see well thought-out arguments after a night of pure BS from DB and Nfnick.

[SmootSmack]

I'm sorry but Tripp's argument is just words. There's no video proof, no pictures, no claymation even. Until then, it's just bunk

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm sorry but Tripp's argument is just words. There's no video proof, no pictures, no claymation even. Until then, it's just bunk

Wait, you can just mute your computer before you play the Wilcots clip...It magically changes the material to be a Campbell development tape.

Seriously though, if you watch with the sound off, it just looks like an NFL QB taking what the defense gives him. It's so boring and status quo that you probably won't get through the second clip.

[GTripp0012]

I'm just glad we're in 3rd and 12+ so often. That really speaks to the slashing running game we have and all the penalties we don't get.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

But, why don't we actually go a step further, and break down Wilcots' breakdown.

Play 1

Campbell faces a 5 man overload rush against 6 man protection. The Redskins have the play picked up. Campbell's first read is open, so he goes to him, completing the pass and Moss is tackled short of the first down. The video shows that Moss was the correct read. Wilcots suggested that the game situation dictated that Campbell should have held the ball the extra second, and try to thread it into Randle El who was a yard short of the marker on 3 and 13.

Wilcots does not tell you that the Redskins were going to, and did go for it on fourth down. (This would hurt his argument) It's not like this is important or anything. Because getting 7 yards when you need to get 13 in two plays is sooooo useless.

For the record, Campbell's pass at the first down marker on 4th down was broken up. Randle El fell down.

Play 2

Redskins protect only 5 against a 4 man rush. Samuels is clearly beaten off the snap, and Campbell has pressure immediately.

Thrash is on a clear out route at the top of the screen. The corner turns him loose into cover two and the safety doesn't go over.

This looks terrible because Wilcots puts a #2 on Thrash before the play. But wait, Thrash was running a clear out, he doesn't even look back at the quarterback. That's not a read in the progression, he's supposed to take the safety out the play. That's his job.

Naming Thrash as the second receiver is utter bullshit from Wilcots. He's simply NOT in the progression. If Campbell had extended the play to the right side of the field, perhaps he would have hit him with a pass. Otherwise, it's clear Portis was the ONLY throw on this play. There is nothing evidence about this.

The 8 yards MOVED THE REDSKINS INTO FIELD GOAL RANGE ON THIRD AND 13. Zorn passed on a 52 yard field goal attempt for a pooch punt...which Plack put in the end zone, probably because of a curse that Campbell put on him because he was leaving the field.

Play 3

This is a designed play called by Zorn that the Giants sniffed out. ALL THREE DEEP RECEIVERS ARE ON CLEARS, AND ALL THREE ARE PROPERLY COVERED.

This was not a good call by Zorn, or at least it wasn't going to work into a zone defense. If they had caught the Giants in a blitz, it's a 40 yard TD pass. They didn't, and they didn't convert. I don't even know what Wilcots is putting on Campbell. That he should have changed the play in the huddle? That he should have drawn the Giants offsides with his cadence?

Needless to say, Wilcots' sample consists of a 3rd and 12, a 3rd and 13, and a 3rd and 17. Boy, what a freakin bum right.

Not one missed read in the entire clip. Just bad analysis from a bad analyst.

Nice post, unfortunately we're dealing with the "reality-challenged". I tried something similar earlier with the same result (no response from "Mr. I saw it on NFLN, it must be right").

http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-l...tml#post566090