Bargain Hunting in the NFL

[Oldfan]

Except for a minor hamstring injury in 2004, this Mark Brunell we are seeing over the last three games is the same QB who looked so bad last year. So, what's the difference?

Coaching.

During the bye week, while preparing for Seattle, Gibbs and staff upgraded their scheme. The play calling is no longer conservative and predictable, the protection scheme was improved, and the game plan included plays that utilized Brunell's strengths and minimized his weaknesses.

What we have witnessed is not the rejuvenation of Mark Brunell but a striking example of how big a difference the right scheme can make on a player's performance.

With that in mind, I want to make a point about grading personnel.

Think of the salary cap and the draft choices as a budget. In order to field the best possible team, you need to try to find bargains with every selection. Players coming from winning teams, where they had a strong supporting cast and were well-coached to maximize their talents are rarely bargains. You have to look for players with talent who have never been in the right situation.

It's highly unlikely that Jason Campbell is a bargain. It was highly unlikely that Clinton Portis would be a bargain. Both came from programs which maximized their opportunity to perform well.

Joey Harrington, David Carr or Patrick Ramsey might prove to be a bargain for their next team.

[G-Prime]

Except for a minor hamstring injury in 2004, this Mark Brunell we are seeing over the last three games is the same QB who looked so bad last year. So, what's the difference?

Not being injured.. Like everyone has been saying all year long.

[LegionOfDoom]

You just made 1 thread out of 2 threads.... kill two birds with one stone.

[Oldfan]

Gothtimus writes...Not being injured.. Like everyone has been saying all year long.

Everyone has been saying that?

I heard Gibbs blame the hammy for Brunell's bad performance. Then I heard him say that Ramsey's superior performance could be attributed to improvements in the offensive scheme.

Now, suppose Brunell had played the entire year.

Would the nagging hamstring have prevented him from playing better after the offensive scheme was improved?

The hamstring theory doesn't hold up to account for such a remarkable difference. The injury just isn't that restrictive. That's why he was allowed to play.

[oriolesfan93p]

if you wanna talk about bargin hunting, look at denver and the people they picked up from cleveland, nobody thought they were any good, and look at them now, with the right coaching everyone is now calling them the best in the league

[kingdaddy]

if you wanna talk about bargin hunting, look at denver and the people they picked up from cleveland, nobody thought they were any good, and look at them now, with the right coaching everyone is now calling them the best in the league

I see your point, but, Denver is overrated. They have won some big games at home against some good teams. Let's see their act on the road. I can see the Giants putting a big "L" on them this week at the Meadowlands.

Another way to make this point is Jeremiah Trotter. A true product of the Eagles defensive system. Overall, I'll bet there are more players who change teams and disappear then ones who continue to thrive.

[Oldfan]

oriolesfan93p...if you wanna talk about bargin hunting, look at denver and the people they picked up from cleveland...

Exactly. And for those who think that QB ratings are useful, compare the ratings for Jake Plummer, Arizona to Jake Plummer, Denver.

Individual stats are in large measure team stats.

[Drex]

if you wanna talk about bargin hunting, look at denver and the people they picked up from cleveland, nobody thought they were any good, and look at them now, with the right coaching everyone is now calling them the best in the league

In addition to the correct coaching, the Broncos defense has better personnel. They have a trio of ball hawking, fast linebackers and in last year's draft, they picked up bargains at the cb position in Williams and Foxworth that are already contributing to the defensive unit.

Add a healthy Trevor Price to the equation, and you see how Denver is getting it done on the defensive side of the football.

[barry wilburn]

The issue w/ Brunell is confidence and trust in his receivers among other things including health, Moss and tweaks to the scheme. No way it is as simple as "the scheme" alone. I think that people understate the complexity and creativity of last year's scheme and overstate the creativity of this year's scheme.

Also, not sure what point you are making about grading personnel. In some ways Gibbs and Ceratto have it right when it comes to the QB and value. Their philosophy is that for that one position the only thing that matters is getting someone good to run the show. Bad QB play kills NFL teams and gets coaches fired. It's fine to build a roster around value, but a crappy QB who happens to have a low cap number is a sure way to go 5-11. At this point, I'll take Brunell's 8.6mm bonus anyday. Overpriced? Sure. But I wouldn't trade him for Kerry Collins, Kyle Boller or Tim Rattay in a heartbeat and all of those guys are bargains.

[RabidFan]

Well Gibbs did say the trainers told him after Brunell's hammy injury last year that his leg was black and blue from top to bottom....that sounds pretty awful to me and he never once ****ed about it or used it as an excuse....here's to Brunell as a man!!

[Oldfan]

kingdaddy... Another way to make this point is Jeremiah Trotter. A true product of the Eagles defensive system. Overall, I'll bet there are more players who change teams and disappear then ones who continue to thrive.

You're right. Trotter is a good example of a free agent whose value was enhanced by the system he played in.

I agree that Denver is overrated as well.

[Riggo-toni]

wanna talk about great bargains: Griffin, Washington, Springs...and they're the core of our defense.

[zoony]

So, what's the difference?

Coaching.

During the bye week, while preparing for Seattle, Gibbs and staff upgraded their scheme. The play calling is no longer conservative and predictable, the protection scheme was improved, and the game plan included plays that utilized Brunell's strengths and minimized his weaknesses.

What we have witnessed is not the rejuvenation of Mark Brunell but a striking example of how big a difference the right scheme can make on a player's performance.

Sorry. The playbook does not get opened until Gibbs trusts his guy. You saw vanilla schemes last year because Mark was not familiar with the system and Patrick's propensity to throw the ball to the covered guy.

Mark developed that trust in the preseason and the Dallas game. Joe has rewarded Mark with an opened playbook.

With that in mind, I want to make a point about grading personnel.

Think of the salary cap and the draft choices as a budget. In order to field the best possible team, you need to try to find bargains with every selection. Players coming from winning teams, where they had a strong supporting cast and were well-coached to maximize their talents are rarely bargains. You have to look for players with talent who have never been in the right situation.

Have you seen Brunell's contract numbers? Are you saying he is a bargain considering his age?

It's highly unlikely that Jason Campbell is a bargain.

You will eat those words. It is obvious to me that you are not a fan of SEC football and you didn't watch Campbell at Auburn. The guy is an INCREDIBLE bargain. In fact, it was his supporting cast that allowed us to take him so low... thankfully most prognasticators thought the way you did and credited Campbell's success with the running game.

I know MILLIONS of Volunteer, Gator, and Bulldog fans who know how foolish it is to discount what Campbell did at Auburn. He was DEADLY.

It was highly unlikely that Clinton Portis would be a bargain. Both came from programs which maximized their opportunity to perform well.

You might be right about Clinton. The story, however, is FAR from over.

Joey Harrington, David Carr or Patrick Ramsey might prove to be a bargain for their next team.

That is ridiculous. By now a star will have shown you something. Insert Brady, Vick, Manning, etc. into ANY ONE of those situations and they still would have become a star.

Sorry, Harrington and Ramsey are just o.k. Check back in 3 years and you will see I'm correct.

[Oldfan]

Riggo-toni...wanna talk about great bargains: Griffin, Washington, Springs...and they're the core of our defense.

Agreed. And supporting my theory...notice that none of the three came from well-coached, highly successful defensive units.

Now, here's the question. When they become free agents again should we spend the cap money to outbid the competition to keep them? I wouldn't...because much of their success is due to playing in a successful defensive system...they will no longer be bargains.

[Oldfan]

zoony writes...The playbook does not get opened until Gibbs trusts his guy.

Gibbs gave up a number three pick and a 43 mil cap hit over six years for Jacksonville's backup QB who would have been a free agent after 2004. He starts him and sticks with him for nine games until the season is down the tubes. And you're saying that Gibbs never opened up the playbook because he didn't trust him?

[zoony]

zoony writes...The playbook does not get opened until Gibbs trusts his guy.

Gibbs gave up a number three pick and a 43 mil cap hit over six years for Jacksonville's backup QB who would have been a free agent after 2004. He starts him and sticks with him for nine games until the season is down the tubes. And you're saying that Gibbs never opened up the playbook because he didn't trust him?

Yes.

Did you see Brunell throw the ball last year? Compare that to how he's thrown it this year in the preseason and since week 2. Not even close.

And who did he have to turn to? We saw what Ramsey did in the Cincy game when he came in on relief. Threw it right to the Bengals DB's 5 times. :doh:

Gibbs never trusted Ramsey, either.

Case in point, trading up to draft Campbell.

........

[TheLongshot]

Except for a minor hamstring injury in 2004, this Mark Brunell we are seeing over the last three games is the same QB who looked so bad last year. So, what's the difference?

Coaching.

Not in the way you are meaning it. Brunell's mechanics were screwed up, throwing a lot of balls at receiver's shoetops. Also, you can say that things are better because we have better receivers. As a counterarguement, you can say that this is basically the same offense as last year. What's the difference?

Execution.

You will eat those words. It is obvious to me that you are not a fan of SEC football and you didn't watch Campbell at Auburn. The guy is an INCREDIBLE bargain. In fact, it was his supporting cast that allowed us to take him so low... thankfully most prognasticators thought the way you did and credited Campbell's success with the running game.

I don't think he was insinuating that Campbell wasn't going to be great. I think the point was that we gave up three picks to get him, therefore no matter how good he is, he'll never be a bargain.

Course, it doesn't matter ultimatly if players are a bargain if you get the right players. Certainly, you need your share of cheap players to come up from the depths of the rosters nowadays to compete from season to season, since free agency will sap talent from your team. It is good to lock up young guys who can compete, let those go who you think you can replace with a younger guy, and lock up the guys you can't live without.

Jason

[zoony]

I don't think he was insinuating that Campbell wasn't going to be great. I think the point was that we gave up three picks to get him, therefore no matter how good he is, he'll never be a bargain.

I see your point, but I would argue that in today's NFL there is no price to high to pay for a quality QB.

There are only a handful of teams in the NFL that have quality QB's... and make no mistake those are the same teams who are in the playoffs every year. Make no mistake whatsoever.

I would give up the Redskins entire draft for two years straight to get Tom Brady. In a second. But you know what? NO WAY BELLICHECK goes for it. No way at all... he knows where his bread is buttered.

That is beside the point... the real question is if Campbell will become a marquee QB. I dunno, but I liked what he did at Auburn, and it is my opinion that you MUST have a quality guy behind center in order to win consistently in this league. I like the move, and if Campbell pans out, it will be the bargain of bargains.

....

[Oldfan]

So, Zoony...

you think Joe was lying when he said, at different times during the season, that Brunell and Ramsey had his confidence?

And, if he hadn't opened up his playbook because he didn't trust his QBs, why did he bring in Musgrave and consent to the shotgun formation which he personally opposed? I mean, to me, that sounds like someone searching for answers to a problem.

As for Campbell, I've read the scouting reports which had him pegged as going from round two to four. I understand he made a late push in the draft. I've seen him play a few times. Nice touch on the ball. Lousy footwork.

I heard an Auburn coach quoted in comparing their QB this year to Campbell. He said the guy wasn't as good an athlete as Campbell but was a more accurate passer. So, I'm thinking...we gave up three picks for a guy who was the second most accurate passer on his college team?

[cchandler]

"Players coming from winning teams, where they had a strong supporting cast and were well-coached to maximize their talents are rarely bargains. You have to look for players with talent who have never been in the right situation.

It's highly unlikely that Jason Campbell is a bargain."

Jason Campbell played for four different offensive coordinators over four years at Auburn. Each brought their own schemes, and not all of them maximized Jason's potential.

Still, he shined despite not having the best supporting cast for much of the time. Last year was the first year he played with competent, reliable receivers. Two years before that, Carnell Williams broke his leg, then Ronnie Brown went out with an injury, and Jason carried his team to a victory over a good Alabama team in the iron bowl.

I see your point, but Jason Campbell doesn't fit the mold that you're describing. He excelled more than ever last year under offensive coordinator Al Borges, but his talent was always there.

You should think of his play last year as a sign of how good he could in an offense designed around his abilities.

[oriolesfan93p]

we will have to see, he is going to learn the system as it changes and in a couple years, he will be taking over for mark hopefully. Accuracy can be taught but athletic ability can't, so him not being as accurate but being the better athlete is the better part of that bargain

[Bucaro]

Campbell completed 69.4% of his passes, that is about as accurate as it gets in college. On top of the fact Gibbs said his accuracy and pocket pressence was what initially drew the Skins to Campbell. Gotta disagree on the accuracy thing

[zoony]

So, Zoony...

you think Joe was lying when he said, at different times during the season, that Brunell and Ramsey had his confidence?

link?

I remember Gibbs praising Brunell and Ramsey on several occasions, but never that they had his complete confidence. I might be wrong.

But it is well documented that Gibbs is a master of coachspeak, etc. Actions speak much louder than words.

And, if he hadn't opened up his playbook because he didn't trust his QBs, why did he bring in Musgrave and consent to the shotgun formation which he personally opposed? I mean, to me, that sounds like someone searching for answers to a problem.

implementation of the shotgun is irrelevant in this discussion. Or is it your contention that it is impossible to 'open up' an offense without using the shotgun?

Joe Gibbs simply saw that with today's blitz packages, the shotgun could be a real benefit to give the QB extra time.

Lousy footwork.

The only thing I can think of that would make you say this is that he is not a scrambler.

His footwork in the pocket, however, is very good. He has very good escapability and can avoid the rush. That is one of his strengths... so I assume you meant to type that he is not a scrambler. ??

I heard an Auburn coach quoted in comparing their QB this year to Campbell. He said the guy wasn't as good an athlete as Campbell but was a more accurate passer. So, I'm thinking...we gave up three picks for a guy who was the second most accurate passer on his college team?

Don Breaux is quoted as saying that the very reason Campbell was drafted was because of his accuracy.

Campbell was criticized for a lot, but never for being innacurate.

Here is the scouting report if you're interested.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/2005/campbell_jason

[Oldfan]

TheLongshot... As a counterarguement, you can say that this is basically the same offense as last year. What's the difference? Execution.

Except for the formation, the offense we finished with in 2004 wasn't the same as the offense we started with. The offensive scheme we used in the preseason this year, wasn't the same as we finished with in 2004 (Musgrave, shotgun).

And the offense we used in games one and two this year differed in play calling approach and pass protection schemes from that we are now using.

Some of the improvement is due to better execution. I'll grant that. But the bulk of it is in an improved scheme.

Joe Gibbs told us that he was going to open up the offense this season to achieve more balance. Mark Brunell's performance appears much better because Joe kept his word on that.

[Riggo-toni]

Riggo-toni...wanna talk about great bargains: Griffin, Washington, Springs...and they're the core of our defense.

Agreed. And supporting my theory...notice that none of the three came from well-coached, highly successful defensive units.

Now, here's the question. When they become free agents again should we spend the cap money to outbid the competition to keep them? I wouldn't...because much of their success is due to playing in a successful defensive system...they will no longer be bargains.

I hope we start following an Eagles strategy with our guys - locking them up a couple years in advance before they become free agents.

Santana Moss is actually the PERFECT example of a great talent misused in a bad scheme. He's a prototypical Air Coryell guy, but couldn't get much done with a noodle arm QB in a dink and dunk Hackett offense. And while I'm on the topic, Pennington is a guy who found himself in the eprfect system under Hackett, a system that frustrated Testaverde in the same way that Philly's conversion to WCO pushed Cunningham needlessly into early retirement, only to see him re-emerge as the leagues best QB in '98 on his way to breaking the Skins' season scoring record.