How Will Campbell Be Handled?

PSUSkinsFan21 · 03-29-2006, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huddle

Mattyk72

You seem to be saying that platooning can't be done gradually. Is that it?

I don't want to speak for Matty, but personally I would just like a little more detail as to what you're proposing they do.......because everything you've said so far sounds like the same type of platooning that has been attempted and failed in the past. So what is different about your gradual platooning from what we've seen fail before?

MTK · 03-29-2006, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huddle

Mattyk72

You seem to be saying that platooning can't be done gradually. Is that it?

What the heck is a gradual platoon??

So by playoff time Campbell is the starter? Do they alternate starts, snaps, series, quarters... what exactly do you have in mind for this platoon??

I'm sorry but the more I hear the more absurd this is sounding. Or actually the less I hear because you haven't given much detail.

Platoons at QB don't work in the NFL, that's the bottom line.

If you have a platoon it's because your team stinks, you don't have a clear-cut #1 guy, or you have injuries.

Once again I will ask for an example of a successful QB platoon in the NFL. And by successful I mean a platoon that at least got a team to the playoffs.

Master4Caster · 03-29-2006, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Huddle, when was the last successful QB platoon that resulted in a playoff and or Super Bowl appearance??

That Kilmer/Jurgensen platoon worked pretty good!

(This thread needs some levity!)

gibbsisgod · 03-29-2006, 10:22 AM

gibbs knows how to handle the qb situation, he knew that ramsey gave us the best chance to win late in '04, and wasnt afraid to admit that brunell gave us the best chance in '05. he will start the best guy no matter what WE think is 'right'

SmootSmack · 03-29-2006, 10:30 AM

I don't think Dilfer/Frye was a platoon. Dilfer started the first several games with Frye not playing at all. I think maybe the 10th and 11th game Frye got some playing time. Then he started the rest of the season with Dilfer not playing at all.

I wouldn't classify that as a platoon. They weren't alternating games. I would say that's a veteran QB playing until the young'n is ready. Which I suspect is what will happen here. I've seen too little of Campbell to know when that will be.

MTK · 03-29-2006, 10:39 AM

Didn't we have a rookie QB in 2002 by the name of Patrick Ramsey??

Besides, Campbell is not a rookie so comparing him to Frye is irrelevant as you would say.

PSUSkinsFan21 · 03-29-2006, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Didn't we have a rookie QB in 2002 by the name of Patrick Ramsey??

That's irrelevant because his last name didn't start with an "F".

Huddle · 03-29-2006, 10:54 AM

Mattyk72

Quote:

Didn't we have a rookie QB in 2002 by the name of Patrick Ramsey??

Yes but the rotation we had was not designed to prepare Ramsey for the NFL. It was not platooning with a plan to make it easier for him to adjust.

Quote:

Besides, Campbell is not a rookie so comparing him to Frye is irrelevant as you would say.

That Frye didn't spend a year holding a clipboard strengthens my argument. Campbell should do even better.

MTK · 03-29-2006, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huddle

Mattyk72

Yes but the rotation we had was not designed to prepare Ramsey for the NFL. It was not platooning with a plan to make it easier for him to adjust.

That Frye didn't spend a year holding a clipboard strengthens my argument. Campbell should do even better.

Irrelevant

PSUSkinsFan21 · 03-29-2006, 10:49 AM

And before you start playing the "I'm being attacked" card again, I will repost my entire paragraph so as not to be taken out of context by the selective quoting you so love to do:

"I mean I really hate to be the one to break this to you, but your points are no more valid than anyone else's on this site. We are all offering our OPINIONS. You can't prove the QB platoon will work or that it is a good idea for the Skins in the long run. And I can't prove that it's a bad thing (although I can point out that it's never worked in the NFL to any degree of appreciable success). So, what we are doing here is arguing, and offering support for our arguments. You think the Browns are a worthwhile example to support your stance, I think the Skins are a worthwhile example to support my stance. My example is no less relevant than yours just because it stands in opposition to your opinion. Are you starting to see how this whole thing works here?"

What's frustrating about your posts is your desire to discount others' arguments as "irrelevant" and give them no credence, while you go forward with the misconception that all of your points are "relevent". Relevancy is not a determination of what most convinces you one way or another. So please stop confusing "irrelevant" posts with posts that you simply are not convinced by.

TheMalcolmConnection · 03-29-2006, 10:56 AM

Right, and if he doesn't get a lot of game experience, how will we ever know?

PSUSkinsFan21 · 03-29-2006, 12:03 PM

Huddle,

I recognized in post #45 that I agree, in part, with those who said we got to the playoffs in spite of Brunell, not because of him. I also believe that the vastly better WR corp, O-coordinator, and (God willing) a healthy O-line would set Brunell up for a successful year.

I agree with you that defense, running game and special teams were the primary reasons we got into the playoffs last year. I think our only difference, at this point, is our view of whether Brunell can get the job done given this year's personnel or whether he can't....and, of course, whether platooning is a good idea for this year's Skins.

Huddle · 03-29-2006, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PSUSkinsFan21

Huddle,

I recognized in post #45 that I agree, in part, with those who said we got to the playoffs in spite of Brunell, not because of him. I also believe that the vastly better WR corp, O-coordinator, and (God willing) a healthy O-line would set Brunell up for a successful year.

I agree with you that defense, running game and special teams were the primary reasons we got into the playoffs last year. I think our only difference, at this point, is our view of whether Brunell can get the job done given this year's personnel or whether he can't....and, of course, whether platooning is a good idea for this year's Skins.

I'm willing to agree to disagree at this point. How about you?

PSUSkinsFan21 · 03-29-2006, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huddle

I'm willing to agree to disagree at this point. How about you?

Agreed

PSUSkinsFan21 · 03-29-2006, 12:23 PM

I'm setting the line at 17 more posts before this thread gets locked if the infamous "statistics" argument gets opened up again. Who's got the over, who's got the under?

03-29-2006, 10:30 AM	#5
SmootSmack Uncle Phil Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 45,256	Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled? I don't think Dilfer/Frye was a platoon. Dilfer started the first several games with Frye not playing at all. I think maybe the 10th and 11th game Frye got some playing time. Then he started the rest of the season with Dilfer not playing at all. I wouldn't classify that as a platoon. They weren't alternating games. I would say that's a veteran QB playing until the young'n is ready. Which I suspect is what will happen here. I've seen too little of Campbell to know when that will be. __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

03-29-2006, 10:39 AM	#6
MTK Hail Raiser Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 53 Posts: 100,050	Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled? Didn't we have a rookie QB in 2002 by the name of Patrick Ramsey?? Besides, Campbell is not a rookie so comparing him to Frye is irrelevant as you would say. __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

03-29-2006, 10:49 AM	#10
PSUSkinsFan21 The Starter Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Philadelphia, PA Age: 49 Posts: 1,340	Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled? And before you start playing the "I'm being attacked" card again, I will repost my entire paragraph so as not to be taken out of context by the selective quoting you so love to do: "I mean I really hate to be the one to break this to you, but your points are no more valid than anyone else's on this site. We are all offering our OPINIONS. You can't prove the QB platoon will work or that it is a good idea for the Skins in the long run. And I can't prove that it's a bad thing (although I can point out that it's never worked in the NFL to any degree of appreciable success). So, what we are doing here is arguing, and offering support for our arguments. You think the Browns are a worthwhile example to support your stance, I think the Skins are a worthwhile example to support my stance. My example is no less relevant than yours just because it stands in opposition to your opinion. Are you starting to see how this whole thing works here?" What's frustrating about your posts is your desire to discount others' arguments as "irrelevant" and give them no credence, while you go forward with the misconception that all of your points are "relevent". Relevancy is not a determination of what most convinces you one way or another. So please stop confusing "irrelevant" posts with posts that you simply are not convinced by. __________________ "Hail to the Redskins!" and "Fight on State!"

03-29-2006, 10:56 AM	#11
TheMalcolmConnection I like big (_\|_)s. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Charlottesville, Virginia Age: 44 Posts: 19,264	Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled? Right, and if he doesn't get a lot of game experience, how will we ever know? __________________ Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

03-29-2006, 12:03 PM	#12
PSUSkinsFan21 The Starter Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Philadelphia, PA Age: 49 Posts: 1,340	Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled? Huddle, I recognized in post #45 that I agree, in part, with those who said we got to the playoffs in spite of Brunell, not because of him. I also believe that the vastly better WR corp, O-coordinator, and (God willing) a healthy O-line would set Brunell up for a successful year. I agree with you that defense, running game and special teams were the primary reasons we got into the playoffs last year. I think our only difference, at this point, is our view of whether Brunell can get the job done given this year's personnel or whether he can't....and, of course, whether platooning is a good idea for this year's Skins. __________________ "Hail to the Redskins!" and "Fight on State!"

03-29-2006, 10:22 AM	#4
gibbsisgod Playmaker Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: 129 W 81st street Age: 47 Posts: 3,503	Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled? gibbs knows how to handle the qb situation, he knew that ramsey gave us the best chance to win late in '04, and wasnt afraid to admit that brunell gave us the best chance in '05. he will start the best guy no matter what WE think is 'right'

03-29-2006, 12:23 PM	#15
PSUSkinsFan21 The Starter Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Philadelphia, PA Age: 49 Posts: 1,340	Re: How Will Cambell Be Handled? I'm setting the line at 17 more posts before this thread gets locked if the infamous "statistics" argument gets opened up again. Who's got the over, who's got the under? __________________ "Hail to the Redskins!" and "Fight on State!"

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

How Will Campbell Be Handled?

Locker Room Main Forum