![]() |
|
|||||||
| Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: 129 W 81st street
Age: 47
Posts: 3,503
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
You say "slutty cheerleader" like its a bad thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
The Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The Southeast
Age: 42
Posts: 2,119
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
Oh not at all - just a little less appealing when the analogy places a team of 11 sweating, filthy defensive players in the place of the slutty cheerleader.
__________________
Your post count, reputation score, popularity ranking, VIP tag or funny signature has no bearing on how I value you as an individual. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Uncle Phil
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
As has been said, Brunell is part of the problem but not the ony problem. And it's hard to say Campbell would be better when he hasn't played yet. I would guess that Gibbs and Saunders would maybe even want to be more conservative with an inexperienced QB in there.
I just want to see JC play so we can shift the theme on the majority of our threads about his performance on the field
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: VA
Age: 43
Posts: 17,620
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
the playcalling gets more 3-0s = defense is on the field longer GTripp, that's what parcells was saying. because of the playcalling the defense isn't put in great position and gets more time on the field.
when you've got a bad defense, you should ball control to keep them on the sidelines. how many games has portis run 14 times total? that's the point, but whenever it's brought up you seem to gloss over that. as far as campbell, the "not enough experience to go out and get experience" excuse is just wearing thin. i doubt we'll go 8-1 or even 7-2 over the rest of the schedule, in which case seeing what he can do and letting him learn NOW would be a good idea. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
The Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The Southeast
Age: 42
Posts: 2,119
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
Quote:
The defense, on the other hand, ranks about #26 in 3rd down stops, or obviously towards the bottom of the pack. In other words, as bad as we think the offense is on 3rd downs, we're perfectly average as far as the rest of the league is concerned. Our offense isn't putting the defense on the field after 3rd down any more or less than most. However, the defense is worst than most in stopping on 3rd down. I'm totally with you on Portis not getting enough carries. This entire offensive scheme is very suspect in my opinion.
__________________
Your post count, reputation score, popularity ranking, VIP tag or funny signature has no bearing on how I value you as an individual. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: VA
Age: 43
Posts: 17,620
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
fair points, and i agree the D is really bad right now, but i'm not sold that the offense isn't also bad, that's all. and GTripp sorta comes off as saying there's absolutely no problem there (in my opinion), whether that's his intention or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
Quote:
On the contrary, if you thought that the additions we made would make us a top three offense, and that was your expectation, then its pretty obvious this group hasn't reached your standards, and thus is underachieving. There are better offenses then us around the league. And of course if you expected perfection (and there are people on this fourm who do), then there are a lot of problems. Brunell isn't perfect, Moss isn't perfect, Portis isn't perfect...etc. So yeah, then you call for Brunell's head, get Campbell, and as soon as he isnt perfect, call for his head. I think a lot of us preseason, were thinking this would be a defensive mided football team, with a stronger offense than last year (cause thats what I was thinking). Well, one unit has met expectations, one hasn't, IMO. So rather than blame the unit that did meet expectations, I'm fed up with the one that didn't.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: VA
Age: 43
Posts: 17,620
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
Quote:
The offense was on fire for the texans and jags, but beside that, in the competitive parts of games, they've been somewhat invisible. last year they were more clutch (putting up 35 when it still mattered vs TB, 19 and like 322yards passing vs DEN, a decent showing vs SD, KC, etc), and then the defense became clutch down the stretch. this year we've had 2 games of killer offense and 5 games of bad offense until garbage time kicked in. that's NOT better overall, even if you expected no change at all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
Quote:
They were more clutch last year, obviously. Which explains the descrepency between 3.8 estimated wins and 2 actual wins. This team isn't getting it done at crunch time on either side of the ball. But if you ask yourself why that is, it eventually boils down to a relative degree of chance. Theres no other real reason for why this team has all their good plays when it doesn't matter. Law of averages says if you stay the course, it will even out. Athletes are always under extreme pressure, and every offense in the league will struggle at times and succeed at others. I believe this poor clutch performance is due almost entirely to chance. Or maybe there's a higher power up there who is seeking vengence on Mark Brunell, and causing the defense to struggle as long as he's the QB of the Redskins??? Is the only solution to bring in JC to reverse the curse? ![]() I understand your garbage time arguement, but simply it affects all teams, not just the Redskins. All numbers I have access to and give have garbage time included in them, so its a double standard to say that Brunell and David Carr get yards due to garbage time, but every other QB in the league doesn't.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: VA
Age: 43
Posts: 17,620
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
well, i only want JC cause i think 2007 would be much better if he got experience before september rolled around. starting with 9 games + a full preseason under your belt is better than coming in without any time served. I don't expect him to come in and magically lead us to 12 straight victories or anything, but hopefully we'd see him get better down the stretch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
Quote:
Right now, however, the focus should still be to win games. If we win the next three (note; HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION). We are 5-5. Most likely no more than 2 games out of first and in at least a tie for 2nd. We play 4 of our final 6 at home, and the two road games are in domes. A year ago, we were 5-6, so we would have a chance to be in a better position than last year. We may not even have to win out. Now lets say (more realistically) we beat Dallas, lose to Phili, beat TB. We are 4-6. No more than 2 games out of 2nd. Likely no more than 3 games out of first. Then we have our six final games in what I would deem "friendly" conditions. Either home, or in a dome. We would have to win out, but its not completely implausible. This is why the situation isn't as dire as some think it is. Now, you have to take it one game at a time and make sure you beat Dallas. Looks like we wont have Moss this week, so you rely on Portis and on a shorter passing game to move the ball. You expect to score about 17, maybe 20 points. And you home beyond hope that the D, at home, makes Tony Romo's day a living hell.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: VA
Age: 43
Posts: 17,620
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
we're 0-2 in division (last year we went 5-1) and unlike when we won out, our D has been awful and we generally haven't lost close games (again unlike last year). I think the play-calling has been beyond terrible as well.
we'll see, but i've seen NOTHING to make me believe they'll switch the flip in time to save the season. and the coaching staff hasn't made a single noticeable adjustment since jacksonville. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
Quote:
The offense and special teams (outside of FG kicking) make be believe there is a chance. There isn't unless the D starts playing better, but I've seen this unit rise from the dead before. Hopefully, the problem was injuries. One good game is all it takes to turn the year around. The entire season to this point has been played in unfavorable conditions (many road games, injuries, bad teams playing well above their potential), and at some point, that's going to turn around.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: VA
Age: 43
Posts: 17,620
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
Quote:
saunders fixed an offense that wasn't broke and and replaced the good plays with stuff that isn't working (we don't have 2 HoF AND pro-bowlers on the OL like he had in KC). the playcalling flat out sucks cause it's built around players that aren't wearing redskin uniforms with an OC that's looking to jump ship as soon as a head coaching job is offered. I mean, where's the creativity in calling the screen so often that the CBs are meeting it in the backfield 50% of the time? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Germantown, Md.
Posts: 4,832
|
Re: Sports Junkies talking about a Campbell rumor
Quote:
That's why it's so difficult to attempt to predict what they're going to do from one game to the next. We've have played seven games thus far and each one looks like a continuation of the last one, the only thing that changes is the other teams uniforms. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|