How Will Campbell Be Handled?

[Huddle]

Originally Posted by 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!"

I suggested the shotgun to Joe in 2004 and he almost threw me out of the room.

So, assistant C should maybe wait a bit and bring it up again. The blinking is a good sign by the way.

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by Huddle

I suggested the shotgun to Joe in 2004 and he almost threw me out of the room.

So, assistant C should maybe wait a bit and bring it up again. The blinking is a good sign by the way.

That's what I like about you, Huddle. You're actually a very good sport. A hopeless antagonist but still a good sport!

[Huddle]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

That's what I like about you, Huddle. You're actually a very good sport. A hopeless antagonist but still a good sport!

Thanks

[Cooley 350Z]

Anybody want to have a pissing contest?

[dcweldon]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...032901059.html

here is an article that states that Coach Gibbs is giving Campbell the chance to win the No. 2 spot this coming training camp and pre-season.

[Huddle]

Originally Posted by dcweldon

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...032901059.html

here is an article that states that Coach Gibbs is giving Campbell the chance to win the No. 2 spot this coming training camp and pre-season.

That our first round QB is ready, after a year of no action, to compete for the back-up job hardly fills me with confidence about his potential. At the very least, it tells us that the coaches don't see him as the next Carson Palmer.

The other interesting thing in this article is the mention that Collins already knows Al Saunders offense. I think we can take that as a definite clue that those who have been speculating that Al came here only to tweak Joe Gibbs' offense from last season are wrong.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Huddle

That our first round QB is ready, after a year of no action, to compete for the back-up job hardly fills me with confidence about his potential. At the very least, it tells us that the coaches don't see him as the next Carson Palmer.

The other interesting thing in this article is the mention that Collins already knows Al Saunders offense. I think we can take that as a definite clue that those who have been speculating that Al came here only to tweak Joe Gibbs' offense from last season are wrong.

except that saunders said in his interview he was going to tweak it to make it more point productive.

The bigger clue of what he's doing comes from the fact that he only brought over 1 assistant coach with him (his son) and not an entire staff like GW has done. 1 assistant and 1 player Maybe wholesale changes will come, but i don't think we'll see a total morph in one year, especially since the main ideas are there and the biggest change is verbage and playcalling.

also, carson palmer was #1 overall in the draft (and not a projected 2nd rounder), sat his first year, and led his team to an 8-8 record his second year. when we're thinking SB, 8-8 isn't going to be good enough.

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by That Guy

also, carson palmer was #1 overall in the draft (and not a projected 2nd rounder), sat his first year, and led his team to an 8-8 record his second year. when we're thinking SB, 8-8 isn't going to be good enough.

Not to mention the fact that Carson Palmer didn't exactly replace the most consistent QB. Kitna had an outstanding year before that but despite that he still is not highly regarded as a perennial overachiever. Carson had the tools, no sense prolonging the inevitable. Brunell is one of the better overall career QB's in the league. His injuries in recent years, of course, cast a shadow of doubt but he at least has proven performance. We made it to the second round of the playoffs when he was not 100% effective (maybe not even 50%). Let's think about what will happen if/when he is.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

I don't mean to be a pessimist, but I have my doubts about this. I AM relieved that Gibbs asked Brunell to add a flexibility program to his workout regimen.

[MTK]

Gibbs is bringing Campbell along slowly, and having a capable veteran in front of him affords him that luxury. I don't think it speaks to Campbell's inability at all.

As I've said many times already, this team is loading up for a championship run. We have a veteran QB who just led us to the playoffs, obviously it makes perfect sense to stick with the veteran, take a shot at winning it all, and in the meantime you give your young QB another year to soak things up on the sideline and be better prepared to take over in 2007.

Two years on the bench is not the end of the world for a QB. More teams would probably do it too if it wasn't for the tremendous investment that is made in first round QBs. In today's win now or else NFL, teams are almost forced to play young QBs before they are truly ready. We should feel lucky that we can allow Campbell to sit and learn.

All that being said, this entire debate can boil down to this for me. Gibbs knows QBs. He knows how to handle them, he's won with multiple guys, and if we can't trust him, who can we?

[724Skinsfan]

Precisely. I doubt Gibbs is somewhere in a cold, dank basement corner self-hugging himself in a fetal position wondering what should he do regarding the QB situation. He knows people and he knows who the best available man for the job is.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Very true. I'm fine as long as Brunell plays like he did at the beginning of the season. And with all the weapons he'll have now, I have no reason to believe he won't. My ONLY thing is that if he gets hurt and knows it's affecting his game, I just wish he would bring that up with Gibbs.

I know Portis can carry the team on his back, but I don't think my heart can take any more of those type of close games.

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

I know Portis can carry the team on his back, but I don't think my heart can take any more of those type of close games.

I should've bought stock in Tums for the amount I chew on watching 'Skins games dating back to 1992. Winning by 8 points or more is/was considered a blowout for me.

[Huddle]

TheMalcolmConnection

My ONLY thing is that if he gets hurt and knows it's affecting his game, I just wish he would bring that up with Gibbs.

Mark Brunell said that the hamstring injury in 2004 wasn't that much of a factor in his lackluster performance that year. My sense is that his strong supporters make the injury theory more of a factor than it really is when assessing Mark's performance. I regard it as a minor factor.

The major factor is his age and the accumulated wear and tear on his body.

In his prime, Brunell's game might be compared to Michael Vick's, a threat to run or pass especially when rolling left. He's not that much of a threat anymore even when he's 100%.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Huddle

Mark Brunell said that the hamstring injury in 2004 wasn't that much of a factor in his lackluster performance that year. My sense is that his strong supporters make the injury theory more of a factor than it really is when assessing Mark's performance. I regard it as a minor factor.

The major factor is his age and the accumulated wear and tear on his body.

In his prime, Brunell's game might be compared to Michael Vick's, a threat to run or pass especially when rolling left. He's not that much of a threat anymore even when he's 100%.

Brunell talked down his hamstring injury in 2004, but I don't think anyone can deny something was drastically hurting his play that year. The Mark Brunell from 2004 was not the Brunell of 2005, or compared to any other year in his career.

After the second Giants game in 2005 he was once again very clearly hampered by his injury. His play dropped off drastically and we saw shades of the 2004 Brunell.

This quote from Gibbs is an indicator that Brunell's leg injuries are a concern:

"Mark's in good shape for his age, [but] his legs are a concern. [We want to] add some things to the offseason program for him from a flexibility standpoint."

Brunell isn't the same QB when his legs are bothering him. He's never had a rocket arm, so much like a finese pitcher in baseball, take away his legs and you have a QB that loses his accuracy and velocity.