How Will Campbell Be Handled?

[PSUSkinsFan21]

Finally, the wisest 14-year-old I know weighs in.

[PWNED]

and one to grow on...

[PSUSkinsFan21]

Boy you're on a roll now PWNED...

[MTK]

I love seeing someone pwn themself

[PWNED]

but seriously though, the rumors are incorrect, are these the same rumors that you keep posting as fact about brunell?

[That Guy]

I'd just like to state the right now Jason Campbell is an unknown. You can't treat him like a superstar or a bust or anything in between. I think it'd be best to watch him play in preseason and see if he's actually any good before proclaiming the great Campbell transition period. This is all squabbling over hypotheticals based off rampant (and varying) assumptions of a complete unknown.

He could be a bust or the best QB in the league, until you're sure of what you've got though, you should go with what you know (Brunell). If Campbell knocks him off with a great preseason performance, I'm all for immediate change. If not, its just a matter of seeing where he's at and how comfortable the coaches would be in inserting him when brunell is either injured or playing poorly.


now to the pointless rebutals:

Originally Posted by huddle

The question we're discussing is whether Gibbs relied heavily on the running game at the end of last year because he wanted to as a matter of philosophy or whether he was forced to by circumstance.

He has always run the football more when he has a lead. There's no change there

can't it be both? we won 5 straight games towards the end, so obviously we had the lead and started running more. brunell wore out at the end, but its not like we averaged 2.0ypc and decided to run anyways. It was working, so we continued to rely on it. I don't see why you'd abandon what's working without a good reason.

Originally Posted by Huddle

Yo, Matty

Here's a stat for you.

From Game One through SF, we averaged 267.5 yards per game. After SF, through the Tampa Bay playoff game, we averaged 143.5 yards per game. That's a 46% drop-off.

Coincidently, that drop off is also attributeable to the loss of patten. If you can blame it all on brunell, I'll go ahead and blame it all on losing patten. once he left moss losst 30yards/game, patten was contributing 24yards/game, and RBs lost 12yards/game receiving (TEs and other WRs made up the rest of the nearly 86 yards/game net loss). once patten went down, non moss WRs went from 3.5 catches a game to less than 1 catch a game.

Its convenient to blame brunell, but the loss of patten and the improvements in the running game also played a big part. (we run with the lead, and we won 5 straight games, so we had to be leading and thus running more for at least parts of those games).

I don't see how this year with better WR depth, better WR talent, and better scheme that we'll somehow be worse off.

Originally Posted by somebody

And I think if it actually wasn't going to inhibit learning as you suggest, then you'd actually see NFL coaches bring QBs along this way. But I never see that happen. It's just not a smart way of doing things.

the very fact that you think people should take your word (without ANY proof) over that of a collective group of experts is either hubris or stupidity. Either way, statements like this are why your credibility is dead.

Originally Posted by Huddle

No denial; but to be candid, the emotional reaction I got surprised me when I simply remarked that IMO conventional football stats are almost useless. I was made to feel like I'd just informed a kindergarten class that there was no Santa.

and yet in that same thread you were proven wrong on every point, and two days later you post an article about how great (DVOA) stats are (which, by the way, are still stats). So its nice that you think you're smarter than everyone else, except it's not true. And you ended up disagreeing with the very post that you thought was so well reasoned :P

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Um yes, I do. Because [NFL coaches] know a lot more about football than I do.

Or, as you seem to be insinuating, do you think you know more than they do?

do i even need to comment? with no experience as an NFL coach, the fact that you'd think you know more than them about any point of their job (as a collective whole) is insane.

and more irony from the unwitting master :P.



here's something that might be relevent:
Unskilled and Unaware of It

[Huddle]

That Guy

I'd just like to state the right now Jason Campbell is an unknown. This is all squabbling over hypotheticals based off rampant (and varying) assumptions of a complete unknown.

He isn't an unknown to Joe Gibbs. Our discussion has been speculation based on Joe's glowing report on Campbell. If you don't want to participate, that's okay.

can't it be both? we won 5 straight games towards the end, so obviously we had the lead and started running more. brunell wore out at the end, but its not like we averaged 2.0ypc and decided to run anyways. It was working, so we continued to rely on it. I don't see why you'd abandon what's working without a good reason.

We ran early in the game. At times, we continued to run even when it wasn't working. The committment to the run was our staffs' adjustment after the Oakland loss and after even the Rams and Cards defenses held down our passing game.

Coincidently, that drop off is also attributeable to the loss of patten. If you can blame it all on brunell, I'll go ahead and blame it all on losing patten.

You're up to your old tricks: putting words in my mouth. Even after I underlined the words in my post saying that there were several causes for the drop-off, you come up with this strawman.

I don't see how this year with better WR depth, better WR talent, and better scheme that we'll somehow be worse off.

Another strawman? Who said we'd be worse off?

the very fact that you think people should take your word (without ANY proof) over that of a collective group of experts is either hubris or stupidity. Either way, statements like this are why your credibility is dead.

And now the personal attack?

and yet in that same thread you were proven wrong on every point, and two days later you post an article about how great (DVOA) stats are (which, by the way, are still stats). So its nice that you think you're smarter than everyone else, except it's not true. And you ended up disagreeing with the very post that you thought was so well reasoned :P

Horse puckey.

do i even need to comment? with no experience as an NFL coach, the fact that you'd think you know more than them about any point of their job (as a collective whole) is insane.

and more irony from the unwitting master :P.

Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm getting the distinct feeling that you don't appreciate my posts.

[That Guy]

Quote:
I'd just like to state the right now Jason Campbell is an unknown. This is all squabbling over hypotheticals based off rampant (and varying) assumptions of a complete unknown.

Originally Posted by huddle

He isn't an unknown to Joe Gibbs. Our discussion has been speculation based on Joe's glowing report on Campbell. If you don't want to participate, that's okay.

Please tell me where i said i didn't want to participate. I said we should be aware of the fact that most of this thread is speculation. Its a valid point.

Once again, I DO NOT NEED YOUR F'ing permission to write posts. Stop acting like i do.

Quote:
can't it be both? we won 5 straight games towards the end, so obviously we had the lead and started running more. brunell wore out at the end, but its not like we averaged 2.0ypc and decided to run anyways. It was working, so we continued to rely on it. I don't see why you'd abandon what's working without a good reason.

Originally Posted by huddle

We ran early in the game. At times, we continued to run even when it wasn't working. The committment to the run was our staffs' adjustment after the Oakland loss and after even the Rams and Cards defenses held down our passing game.

You didn't answer the question, and if it wasn't working, how come portis went on a tear of 100+ yard games and we came out of that stretch 5-0?

We had 257 rushing yards against the Rams, why would we bother passing?

Quote:
Coincidently, that drop off is also attributeable to the loss of patten. If you can blame it all on brunell, I'll go ahead and blame it all on losing patten.

You're up to your old tricks: putting words in my mouth. Even after I underlined the words in my post saying that there were several causes for the drop-off, you come up with this strawman.

First of all, If you read the entire point instead of the out of context bit you replied to, you'd see that i blamed a lot of things besides just patten.

Second, what tricks? This whole thread is about how you don't think the offseason acquisitions are enough to make BRUNELL successful. not to mention your trick of MISQUOTING PEOPLE OUT OF CONTEXT. If you weren't implying that brunell was the reason for our losses, then why did you make this thread? if brunell was fine, why should ANY of us care about campbell and whether he starts? You're backtracking.

Quote:
I don't see how this year with better WR depth, better WR talent, and better scheme that we'll somehow be worse off.

Originally Posted by huddle

Another strawman? Who said we'd be worse off?

Its not a strawman, its simply an opinion (unless you totally lack reading comprehension), but apparently I'm not allowed to have an opinion. Why the F**k do you keep acting like i can't post without you're express permission and approval of my opinions. Stop being a twat.

Let's simplify:
I think the upgrades will make us better next year. Whether YOU said anything or not doesn't matter as I didn't make ANY reference to you.

Quote:
the very fact that you think people should take your word (without ANY proof) over that of a collective group of experts is either hubris or stupidity. Either way, statements like this are why your credibility is dead.

Originally Posted by huddle

And now the personal attack?

How is that a personal attack and not a fact? please PLEASE PLEASE explain why you're smarter than the collective whole of NFL coaches regarding personnel decisions with something concrete. You can't and you're not.

This is you deflecting the attention away from rebutting the statement with a childish "i'm being oppressed" routine.

Please rebut the actual statement instead. or are you going to pull "he didn't ask nicely" routine?

Your methods are tired and played out, and its obvious you've never been part of any real debate because you refuse to argue the merits of the case and instead rely on hoping everyone else has the intelligence of a 5 year and can't see that you never actually respond to valid criticism.

Quote:
and yet in that same thread you were proven wrong on every point, and two days later you post an article about how great (DVOA) stats are (which, by the way, are still stats). So its nice that you think you're smarter than everyone else, except it's not true. And you ended up disagreeing with the very post that you thought was so well reasoned :P

Originally Posted by huddle

Horse puckey.

See, again, valid criticism is ignored because you don't have an answer besides stating that YOU WERE WRONG.

That post is fact. You said stats were almost worthless, and days later you said that DVOA was a good stat and posted an article about it and how it might be useful. THOSE ARE FACTS.

You backtracked, you got caught, so now you refuse to even attempt a rebuttal.

Quote:
do i even need to comment? with no experience as an NFL coach, the fact that you'd think you know more than them about any point of their job (as a collective whole) is insane.

and more irony from the unwitting master :P.

Originally Posted by huddle

Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm getting the distinct feeling that you don't appreciate my posts.

And here's the 3rd time in one post where you refused a rebuttal of valid criticism. What makes you smarter than the collective whole of NFL coaches? you have yet to answer that question.


What i don't like is your hypocrisy, you're inability to defend your statements against valid criticim, you're convenient backtracking, you're attempts to sidetrack issues when you can't defend them, you're proclamations about the rules of debate that change whenever they don't favor you, and you're absolute refusal even possibly consider you might be wrong. Other than that, we're fine.

[That Guy]

as for Brunell wearing out:

Gibbs also said he will try to limit Brunell's practice-field snaps, both during training camp and the season, in an effort to keep the veteran healthy. Gibbs acknowledged that Brunell's leg injuries during his two-year Redskins tenure make for an ongoing concern, and he's spoken to the quarterback about adding a flexibility program to his training regimen.

"He can probably take a little less work during the week, too. . . . Some guys want all the reps, but I think Mark is real comfortable," Gibbs said.

seems campbell is playing most of the preseason and we'll get a good gauge on him. Meanwhile brunell will be kept fresh with less preseason and weekly work.

[PSUSkinsFan21]

LOVED the link ThatGuy. Favorite part:
"But it seems that much of the time, confidence is the over-inflated result of some degree of ignorance. As is the case with many human flaws, perhaps the best remedy is to never stop learning, to seek out and absorb constructive criticism, and to always be prepared to admit that you may be wrong about something."

[PSUSkinsFan21]

Thank you, thank you amorentz......I'll be here all week.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by PSUSkinsFan21

Thank you, thank you amorentz......I'll be here all week.

Don't forget to try the veal.

[amorentz]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Don't forget to try the veal.

And tip your waitress!

[PSUSkinsFan21]

MMMMmmmmmm........veal.......[imput Homer Simpson drooling sound here]

[724Skinsfan]

Coach Joe Gibbs: "Okay, Brunell really slowed down at the end of last year. We need a plan to stay competitive. Any ideas?

Assistant A: "We could try some advanced conditioning and flexibility techniques and maximize his recovery time."

Coach Joe Gibbs: "Good idea! Anybody else?"

Assistant B: "What about employing mass protection for him after the second half of the season?"

Coach Gibbs: "Well, that's a thought but we may not be in a position to do that. Who else?"

Assistant C: "Hey, let's do a gradual platoon thing. We could give JC a couple of snap counts in the early season and progressively increase them as the season went on eventually splitting the time equally between MB and JC.

Joe Gibbs: .....[blink].....[blink, blink].....

Assistant C: "Well, what do you think?"

Joe Gibbs: .....[blink].....[blink,blink]....

Assistant C: {fidgeting nervously} "...uhh, it's been done before....loo-look at Cleveland this past year....t-th-they d-did a good job with that."

Joe Gibbs: .....[blink].....[blink,blink]....

Assistant C:"Uh, just kidding?"

Joe Gibbs: "Okay, I think we'll go with plan A and get Mark's conditioning program upgraded. Thanks guys for your input!"