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

[redskins202]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

I saw Campbell in 2009, but I also saw our offensive line's horrible play as well. I know we need a QB of the future, but as I said, I would rather us build the offensive line first and then pick that QB of the future. Best case scenario, would be to do both.

Regardless of what any fan thinks of Campbell, there are pundits out there (and not ordinary fans like you and I) who feel that Campbell is the top FA QB this offseason and has value. ESPN's Matt Williamson recently said that if the price is right, the Redskins should consider getting pick(s) for Campbell.

As I said, I know Campbell didn't play well, but I'm not as simple minded as some fans to think that he is the only reason we went 4-12. This team needs a franchise left tackle, needs a starting-caliber right tackle, possibly a new center and right guard, a new running game, and a QB of the future. All these things may not be addressed this offseason, but all of these problems are not going to be solved by getting rid of Campbell just for the hell of it. Now extra high picks would help a lot, and for once I want our team to be on the winning end of a lopsided trade and finagle a trade where we get a 1st or 2nd for Campbell.

Campbell a reason but the OL and Portis did bad. But sad to say you blaim the most from the QB unless your O is top 10 and dangerous and your QB had one heck of a season but your D did awful than you cant blaim the O. Look at 08 Saints with Brees, there D was the reason why they sucked.


But its ok me and you will enjoy Bradford but Campbell just AVG with an OL. I recorded every tape and seen this guy to know he isn't it.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by redskins202

He's AVG............and come on...did you see his pick 6 against the Giants game?. How does he mis-throw a pass for a pick 6???does any body else make an mistake like that?.


^^^Candle. And its 70% chance because.

1: Bills-Rams-Vikes-Cards-Jags-Oak- all could use a QB who thinls can be good so look for one of them to atleast offer a 3rd.

2: If we go Bradford look for Campbell to not come back.

70% in my view. 0% unless Candle thinks he can perform for us as just a back up than yea sure.

I'm well aware of the Geico commercial. What I want to know is why you inisist on calling him Candle.

Bills - Right now are looking at Vick, Thigpen, and Edwards as their main option. Not the sexiest lineup but it is what it is.

Rams - Looking at one of the top 3 rookie QB's and Vick.

Vikings - Even if Farve retires the more likely option ends up being Childress trading for a QB that knows his system (ie Kolb or McNabb, with Kolb being the more likely prospect to get traded).

Jaguars - They've invested a lot of money in Garrard and for a frugal franchise thats big. The only QB they're considering right now is Tebow and thats more about selling tickets.

Raiders - Poor Al Davis. Can't see the fact that JaMarcus is a bust.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by redskins202

He's AVG............and come on...did you see his pick 6 against the Giants game?. How does he mis-throw a pass for a pick 6???does any body else make an mistake like that?

Candle. And its 70% chance because.

1: Bills-Rams-Vikes-Cards-Jags-Oak- all could use a QB who thinls can be good so look for one of them to atleast offer a 3rd.

2: If we go Bradford look for Campbell to not come back.

70% in my view. 0% unless Candle thinks he can perform for us as just a back up than yea sure.

I think you are exaggerating on Campbell's abilities, especially when you see analysts say thing like this...

NFL: The Carolina Panthers have depth problems at wide receiver - ESPN

With Shanahan on board, Campbell finally would be fortunate enough to have some offensive stability in terms of the system, expectations and play-calling on a year-to-year basis. For once he wouldn't have to pick up a new language every offseason. Physically, Campbell has what it takes. He can move well enough to execute Shanahan's scheme, has a big strong arm to drive the ball down the field and is accurate enough. The tools are there, and he just had his best year as a starter. I contend that he could use a real confidence boost and some of the responsibility off his plate; he was simply asked to do way too much last year as nearly every aspect of the Redskins' offense crumbled around him. He was also sacked 43 times and was constantly under siege. But the beauty of sticking with Campbell is that the Redskins could then use the resources on building a quick zone-blocking offensive line and finding a ball carrier they can trust. Shanahan does have an impressive history of getting first-round production from mid-round running backs. I can live with the receiving corps that is in place and the defense.

[GridIron26]

This is great news.. Redskins FO (Shanahan and Allen) are definitely doing right things so far; granted it's only based on rumors.. But still...

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Updating the thread title because it's inaccurate

Smart move to tender him at the highest level...when it happens. They won't get a 1st and a 3rd for him but good starting point for trade negotiations

Totally agree.

[SolidSnake84]

Can i ask a question about this? When they say they are "tendering" him, does that mean they will not let him go without getting a 1st and a 3rd?

Or is it them calling somebody's bluff because they realize that Jason will not get those picks....somebody help me out. I'm honestly confused.

[MTK]

If they tender him at the 1st and 3rd level, that's just the starting off point for negotiations. It doesn't mean that he can only be dealt for a 1st and 3rd.

[Daseal]

Originally Posted by redskins202

Campbell a reason but the OL and Portis did bad. But sad to say you blaim the most from the QB unless your O is top 10 and dangerous and your QB had one heck of a season but your D did awful than you cant blaim the O. Look at 08 Saints with Brees, there D was the reason why they sucked.


But its ok me and you will enjoy Bradford but Campbell just AVG with an OL. I recorded every tape and seen this guy to know he isn't it.

You just replaced Firstdown. Congrats.

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by redskins202

Campbell a reason but the OL and Portis did bad. But sad to say you blaim the most from the QB unless your O is top 10 and dangerous and your QB had one heck of a season but your D did awful than you cant blaim the O. Look at 08 Saints with Brees, there D was the reason why they sucked.


But its ok me and you will enjoy Bradford but Campbell just AVG with an OL. I recorded every tape and seen this guy to know he isn't it.

Wow, my head just exploded trying to read that. I think you need a visit from the Keyboard Police, you obviously don't have the proper training to posses one.

[MTK]

202 step up your game son

[PHazard]

Although Campbell isnt the only reason we are 4-12. He's a good chunk of it. When you are the QB, you are the face of the organization. If you win, you get the praise. If you lose, you get the blame. Its the nature of the beast. Peyton Manning did pretty damn well with a shitty offensive line comprised of mid rounders and undrafted free agents. Not to mention a running game that was ranked 32 in the league, or as i like to call DEAD LAST. But he doesnt get sacked cuz he knows how to read a defense and knows where to go with the ball. i am in NO WAY comparing manning and campbell. But a FRANCHISE QB would have gotten more than 4 wins. We had 8 losses of less than ONE possession (against Giants, Lions, Panthers, Chiefs, Cowboys, Eagles, Saints, Chargers). Campbell cant drive down the field at the end of a game against a prevent defense to give his team a chance to win. Say we came back in even half of those games then we're 8-8 and the season doesnt look damn near as dismal. If we won them all (unlikely obviously, we'd be 12-4) lol ridiculous right? And we had a head coach that was so busy being a QB's coach, that our whole team downspiraled and campbell STILL didnt raise his game. Statistically yes but those are deceiving. Not saying campbell was our only problem cuz thats far from the case but a franchise QB can read a defense, make audibles at the line and lead his team to victory. 3 things jason campbell cant not do

[johno]

Originally Posted by redskins202

But its ok me and you will enjoy Bradford but Campbell just AVG with an OL. I recorded every tape and seen this guy to know he isn't it.

it becomes difficult to read this drivel after a while.

Back to the topic at hand, we all know there isnt a team out there that is going to give us a 1st and 3rd for Campbell. What is a more likely offer that we would accept? Should accept?

[SolidSnake84]

Originally Posted by johno

it becomes difficult to read this drivel after a while.

Back to the topic at hand, we all know there isnt a team out there that is going to give us a 1st and 3rd for Campbell. What is a more likely offer that we would accept? Should accept?

A conditional 3rd round pick that could become a 2nd if Jason meets certain criteria during the season.....we could still get a decent runningback or OL with a 3rd round pick.

[CRedskinsRule]

I think teams will try to offer a 3rd, but we should push for either a mid 2nd, or a 3rd and 6th. JC is a proven mid-grade starter and we shouldn't shortchange ourselves, but we also know we want to go a different direction so lets get something for him.

[Player_HTTR]

Originally Posted by SolidSnake84

A conditional 3rd round pick that could become a 2nd if Jason meets certain criteria during the season.....we could still get a decent runningback or OL with a 3rd round pick.

Anything less than a 2cd round pick in my eyes would be more detrimental to the team than actually keeping JC for another season. It is very difficult to say at the moment not knowing who is on the bench at QB2, QB3. We would have to find a decent backup to take less than a 2cd, and isn't that what we already have in JC.