Grade Jason Campbell

Gmanc711 · 12-31-2006, 02:52 PM

Well with all other things considered, I'd give him a B. I think his scrambling ability to just buy some extra time and pick up some short first downs is a great asset to this team. He has some timing issues to work on, and become a little smarter, but I couldn't be happier with what I have seen from him thusfar. I thought he played very very well and I'm excited to see him next year.

skinsfan69 · 12-31-2006, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

vote and discuss, here are his numbers for his 7 starts this year

att: 207
comp: 110
%: 53.1
yds: 1297
TD: 10
INT: 6
rate: 76.5

I gave him a B. Good stats for a first year stater in his 6th offense in 6 years. I think we will see a much more polished QB next year. He and Moss ( along w/ the other WR's) will work out their timimg issues.

celts32 · 12-31-2006, 05:09 PM

Solid B...You can't ask for anything more out of a QB's 1st 7 starts. He played well enough to win most of those games were it not for the worst defense in the NFL backing him up.

GTripp0012 · 01-01-2007, 02:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by celts32

Solid B...You can't ask for anything more out of a QB's 1st 7 starts. He played well enough to win most of those games were it not for the worst defense in the NFL backing him up.

I think any QB in this league can complete at least 55%. I think Jason was too careless with the football trying to force it downfield oftentimes, at least in his first 5 starts. I noticed significant improvement in the Rams game and (not so) conicidentily, we scored 31 pts, even though he was inaccurate, and still completed a low %. But at least he was learning.

Against NYG, he put it all togehter, and was careful (cept the pick) with the ball while being accurate underneath. We had our best offensive game since Jacksonville.

Longtimefan · 12-31-2006, 08:08 PM

I'm giving Jason a B. His play in just seven games has far exceeded my expectations. He's gained invaluable experience, and once he get's more time with his recievers, he's going to be beautiful to watch. He has no flaws that can't be fixed.

jamf · 12-31-2006, 10:17 PM

Are we grading potential or his actual play?
I think he has alot of potential but in my eyes, his actual play is only worthy of a D.

jsarno · 12-31-2006, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamf

Are we grading potential or his actual play?
I think he has alot of potential but in my eyes, his actual play is only worthy of a D.

A little low for me, but at least you're not afraid to tell it like you see it.

dgack · 12-31-2006, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamf

Are we grading potential or his actual play?
I think he has alot of potential but in my eyes, his actual play is only worthy of a D.

Just for shits and giggles, and to put this into perspective a little bit, here are the QB ratings (through 15 games, so it doesnt even get Jason's best game) of QB's in the neighborhood of Jason's final rating:

Jake Delhomme: 79.4
Byron Leftwich: 79.0
Rex Grossman: 77.8
Jon Kitna: 77.6
Daunte Culpepper: 77.0
Eli Manning: 77.0
Jason Campbell: 76.5
Seneca Wallace: 76.2
Alex Smith: 75.2
Michael Vick: 74.9
Trent Green: 74.6
Matt Hasselbeck: 74.5
Ben Roethisberger: 74.0
Matt Leinart: 74.0
Brett Favre: 72.9
Brooks Bollinger: 72.9
Charlie Frye: 72.0
Brad Johnson: 71.9
Jake Plummer: 70.5
Vince Young: 69.7
Drew Bledsoe: 69.2
Joey Harrington: 68.2

jsarno · 01-01-2007, 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dgack

Just for shits and giggles, and to put this into perspective a little bit, here are the QB ratings (through 15 games, so it doesnt even get Jason's best game) of QB's in the neighborhood of Jason's final rating:

Jake Delhomme: 79.4
Byron Leftwich: 79.0
Rex Grossman: 77.8
Jon Kitna: 77.6
Daunte Culpepper: 77.0
Eli Manning: 77.0
Jason Campbell: 76.5
Seneca Wallace: 76.2
Alex Smith: 75.2
Michael Vick: 74.9
Trent Green: 74.6
Matt Hasselbeck: 74.5
Ben Roethisberger: 74.0
Matt Leinart: 74.0
Brett Favre: 72.9
Brooks Bollinger: 72.9
Charlie Frye: 72.0
Brad Johnson: 71.9
Jake Plummer: 70.5
Vince Young: 69.7
Drew Bledsoe: 69.2
Joey Harrington: 68.2

Why campbell doesn't get publicity is beyond me. He has a ton of potential and no one is really noticing. (except Skins fans)

steveo395 · 01-01-2007, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsarno

Why campbell doesn't get publicity is beyond me. He has a ton of potential and no one is really noticing. (except Skins fans)

good

ncskinsfanec · 01-01-2007, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsarno

Why campbell doesn't get publicity is beyond me. He has a ton of potential and no one is really noticing. (except Skins fans)

They'll notice him next year when we're leading the NFC East! I think next year could actually be special, I have complete faith in Gibbs to turn things back around again. You saw how things got turned around after the 6-10 season in '04. Expect a similiar turnaround next season!

jsarno · 01-01-2007, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ncskinsfanec

They'll notice him next year when we're leading the NFC East! I think next year could actually be special, I have complete faith in Gibbs to turn things back around again. You saw how things got turned around after the 6-10 season in '04. Expect a similiar turnaround next season!

Love the optimism, I beleive you're right, and I hope you're right.

GTripp0012 · 01-01-2007, 02:26 AM

Speaking sabremetrically for a second:

I emailed the guy who created the QB projection system (which uses college stats; games started and comp. % to project relative NFL success). His system projected JC to have Palmer/Manning like production in his prime, and that obscenely high projection caused him to write an article titled Will Jason Campbell save the Redskins?

He mentions that his system also projected Campbell to be producing about "4 DPAR per game above replacement (replacement=average NFL backup, DPAR=points (scored minus costed) credited to an individual player adjusted for defenses he faced)" in his second season, or translated to conventional terms: a hair below the production Brunell gave us this season.

I don't have the final DPAR numbers from what amounted to be Campbell's best game as a pro Saturday, so it'd be unfair to judge his season without his best game, but I'm estimating that he will nearly double his season total. If he does, he will have averaged about 2.5 DPAR/G for the year, well below his projection.

What really impressed me was his running skills. All the scouting reports said he had mobility, something we had in Brunell. Campbell not only showed he had pocket presence and escape like that, but that once he encountered defenders, he is still a threat to go around or through them to get yardage. That was very impressive, and obviously an element of the position that Brunell didn't give us.

On the whole, I thought he'd get it a lot sooner, and one game is hardly enough to be certain that he did get it. But on the same side of the coin, he only had 7 starts, so it's tough to see improvement with any certainty.

His Giants game gets a solid A, but the season on a whole gets a C+ from me. He didn't complete enough passes, which is all a QB can control when it boils down to it, until that last game to warrent higher than a C, but I moved him up to a C+ because of his mad running skillz and his intangibles.

EXoffender · 01-01-2007, 01:43 PM

With all the changes the team has been through, no player on this team deserves more or less than a C. The bright spot would have to be the OL play though. And Betts benefitted from this the most.

CrazyCanuck · 01-01-2007, 08:29 PM

2006: B-

2nd half vs. Giants: A

View Poll Results: Grade Jason Campbell for 2006
A	11	10.68%
B	71	68.93%
C	20	19.42%
D	1	0.97%
F	0	0%
Voters: 103. You may not vote on this poll

12-31-2006, 02:52 PM	#1
Gmanc711 Thank You, Sean. Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Gaithersburg, MD Age: 40 Posts: 7,506	Re: Grade Jason Campbell Well with all other things considered, I'd give him a B. I think his scrambling ability to just buy some extra time and pick up some short first downs is a great asset to this team. He has some timing issues to work on, and become a little smarter, but I couldn't be happier with what I have seen from him thusfar. I thought he played very very well and I'm excited to see him next year. __________________ #21

12-31-2006, 05:09 PM	#3
celts32 Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Hackettstown NJ Age: 55 Posts: 2,665	Re: Grade Jason Campbell Solid B...You can't ask for anything more out of a QB's 1st 7 starts. He played well enough to win most of those games were it not for the worst defense in the NFL backing him up. __________________ Section 116 Row 19 “Goal line, goal line. I-left, tight wing, 70 chip on white.” www.facebook.com/HackettstownBeerClub

12-31-2006, 08:08 PM	#5
Longtimefan Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Germantown, Md. Posts: 4,832	Re: Grade Jason Campbell I'm giving Jason a B. His play in just seven games has far exceeded my expectations. He's gained invaluable experience, and once he get's more time with his recievers, he's going to be beautiful to watch. He has no flaws that can't be fixed. __________________ A revolution is coming and it will be televised.

12-31-2006, 10:17 PM	#6
jamf Pro Bowl Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: San Diego Ca Posts: 5,427	Re: Grade Jason Campbell Are we grading potential or his actual play? I think he has alot of potential but in my eyes, his actual play is only worthy of a D.

01-01-2007, 02:26 AM	#13
GTripp0012 Living Legend Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Evanston, IL Age: 38 Posts: 15,994	Re: Grade Jason Campbell Speaking sabremetrically for a second: I emailed the guy who created the QB projection system (which uses college stats; games started and comp. % to project relative NFL success). His system projected JC to have Palmer/Manning like production in his prime, and that obscenely high projection caused him to write an article titled Will Jason Campbell save the Redskins? He mentions that his system also projected Campbell to be producing about "4 DPAR per game above replacement (replacement=average NFL backup, DPAR=points (scored minus costed) credited to an individual player adjusted for defenses he faced)" in his second season, or translated to conventional terms: a hair below the production Brunell gave us this season. I don't have the final DPAR numbers from what amounted to be Campbell's best game as a pro Saturday, so it'd be unfair to judge his season without his best game, but I'm estimating that he will nearly double his season total. If he does, he will have averaged about 2.5 DPAR/G for the year, well below his projection. What really impressed me was his running skills. All the scouting reports said he had mobility, something we had in Brunell. Campbell not only showed he had pocket presence and escape like that, but that once he encountered defenders, he is still a threat to go around or through them to get yardage. That was very impressive, and obviously an element of the position that Brunell didn't give us. On the whole, I thought he'd get it a lot sooner, and one game is hardly enough to be certain that he did get it. But on the same side of the coin, he only had 7 starts, so it's tough to see improvement with any certainty. His Giants game gets a solid A, but the season on a whole gets a C+ from me. He didn't complete enough passes, which is all a QB can control when it boils down to it, until that last game to warrent higher than a C, but I moved him up to a C+ because of his mad running skillz and his intangibles. __________________ according to a source with knowledge of the situation.

01-01-2007, 01:43 PM	#14
EXoffender The Starter Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Norfolk, Va Posts: 1,046	Re: Grade Jason Campbell With all the changes the team has been through, no player on this team deserves more or less than a C. The bright spot would have to be the OL play though. And Betts benefitted from this the most.

01-01-2007, 08:29 PM	#15
CrazyCanuck Serenity Now Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 2,008	Re: Grade Jason Campbell 2006: B- 2nd half vs. Giants: A

Grade Jason Campbell

Locker Room Main Forum