![]() |
|
|
|
|
#1 | ||
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,323
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
Quote:
If you don't want to look it up, watch a game with stop watch that goes to the hundredths. You'll find the following: 3 seconds of pass pro would be considered average 1.5-1.7 seconds on a 3 step drop the ball should be coming out (a QB should not get hit on a 3 step drop) 4-5 seconds behind a good OL on 5-7 step drop 7 seconds of protection almost never happens |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Hail Raiser
![]() Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 53
Posts: 100,048
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Yeah 7 seconds is ridiculous...
Typically if a QB gets a full 3 seconds, that's good protection. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Warpath Hall of Fame
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 35,307
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
30gut we will just have to disagree. Like I stated, I wanted JC to be that franchise type but to me he just doenst have it. From a mental and leadership perspective of the position he gets very low marks. Good Oline or not. Physical standpoint, he has all the tools. Yeah coaching has some to do with it, maybe he has had too many changes but that is water under the bridge. Another year, another coach, another system is not going to benefit JC here, its time to move on. And like I said, management does not want him here, he has had his chance, good luck to him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,323
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
But when people start in with the bashing rhetoric its hard for me to remain silent in the face of spurios claims. http://www.thewarpath.net/618206-post922.html Hey, if you don't think JC can be any better then the 18th QB in the league given the circumstances, cool. But no need to bash the dude. I just don't understand how anyone can judge JC negatively this season. There aren't many QBs in the league that would play better in this situation. And if JC is gone next year who are we gonna find thats actually better? Finding different is easy finding better is another story. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,880
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
I think everything on offense is predicated on and ran through the quarterback. That's why I really believe that the most important thing is to fix that position first, because it is the most important (position) to the offense. To me, you really have to look at the most important positions first to fix things because of the impact they have to their unit and thus their team. Usually, I think one of the last positions that you would consider important on the list is probably a blocker on kickoff returns. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
The Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,555
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
__________________
It has taken a long time, but I have finally realized that nothing I say about the Redskins will have any effect upon anything the Redskins do. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,880
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
My opinion doesn't have a lot of weight and rightfully so, but you have to really listen when someone like Steve Young (who I think has earned his respect) starts his analysis by saying Campbell played a bad game and continues it by putting focus on some of his mistakes. The analysis of these experts also should be used to judge Campbell's play more than the stats. And I don't think there's any analysis that has expressed that Campbell has been playing "very well" up to this point. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
The Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 1,544
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | ||||
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,323
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
Lol, I like Sammy's reveiws too but he's no more an expert then i am. You guys share the same opinion but its still just your opinion. Quote:
But rather the idea that JC does it more then other QBs and that is how a judgement is made. Quote:
LoL, JC pocket presence or lack thereof at the start of the game is due to previous games lack of protection. Although JC had pressure the fumble was his fault the onus is always on the ball carrier to protect the ball. Missed 'big' play? Dude, every QB misses some plays, they pointed out McNabb missing a 'big' play. Quote:
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Hail Raiser
![]() Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 53
Posts: 100,048
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Sorry Buster you were a bit vague in your explanation of "Campbell long passes".
Next time make a play, ok? |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Stephens City, VA
Posts: 2,953
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
I want to go out on a limb here and say that Campbell isn't a flawed QB, it's just that i think he lacks the mental side of the game. Campbell's college coach put it the best when he said earlier this year that the hardest battle they fought in Auburn was getting him to believe in himself. He thinks Jason plays scared.
I see all of these things. The NFL is full of QBs who aren't superstars individually, but can do good things with the team. I think of Jeff Garcia, who didnt' have a strong arm, nor was he big physically, but he could always find a way to win and keep a drive alive... Campbell now reminds me of Brunell in 2006. He isn't quite stinking it up, but he's not doing anything to try and win the game either....
__________________
Time to nut up or shut up |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,880
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
I didn't know this. In hindsight, I think that was very important to note. An athlete won't be able to succeed for very long, if you have to battle to convince him to believe in himself. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 | |
|
The Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,555
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
Brunell 2006: Through 9 weeks TOTAL: 162/260 (62.3%), 1,789 yds, 8 TD, 4 INT, 86.5 rating, 92 rush yds Campbell: Through 7 weeks TOTAL: 136/206 (66.0%), 1,481 yds, 8 TD, 7 INT, 85.8 rating, 103 rush yds The obvious answer is that in 2006 we had a first round QB on the bench and needed to get him in the game, in 2009 we do not have that option. Brunell was also 35 years old. Fair enough. Brunell was also more successful in his career than Campbell ever will be, unfortunately.
__________________
It has taken a long time, but I have finally realized that nothing I say about the Redskins will have any effect upon anything the Redskins do. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Virginia Beach
Posts: 4,347
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Brunell's problem was that his arm strength was gone and he knew he couldn't make the plays he used to.
__________________
"I would bet.....(if), an angel fairy came down and said, '[You can have anything] in the world you would like to own,' I wouldn't be surprised if you said a football club and particularly the Washington Redskins.'' — Jack Kent Cooke, 1996. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
Campbell's issue appears to be that he's been handed a "now or never" scenario, and then given a team with no chance to win now. It's pretty obvious that Campbell is not the right quarterback for this team. Campbell's defense is not trash, it's giving him plenty of chances to win games, but the expectation from the front office is that Campbell leads an offensive resurgence that scores lots of points. You're getting a lot of fumbles and interceptions and careless play from Campbell that seem to just be a result of the situation. Erratic quarterback play is not what this team requires right now, but the front office pretty much got what they asked for.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|