Bargain Hunting in the NFL

[Oldfan]

zoony writes...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.

Well, we agree that actions speak louder than words, especially with Joe Gibbs. However, his actions demonstrated more faith in Mark Brunell than seemed justified at the time. It boggles the mind to think that he would keep his playbook zipped up because he didn't trust that Mark could handle it.

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?

My point was, as I said, that the move to Musgrave and the shotgun (which he had stubbornly opposed in 2004) were the actions of someone looking for answers...not someone who had a bag of tricks up his sleeve waiting for the right time to spring it on us.

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

I read that too. That's why the quote by the Auburn coach baffled me.

I think it's a high risk move anyway you slice it. If Joe Gibbs is right about draftees one in three times, he'll be the best personnel man in the business. Three picks is too much to give up. It's not as though we don't have other needs to fill.

[zoony]

I think it's a high risk move anyway you slice it. If Joe Gibbs is right about draftees one in three times, he'll be the best personnel man in the business. Three picks is too much to give up. It's not as though we don't have other needs to fill.

That is a valid point.

However, if I was running an NFL franchise, I would draft a QB in the first round EVERY YEAR until I got a winner.

And I'm not exaggerating... I seriously would. Prognasticators would call me foolish until I hit paydirt and got the next Manning/Vick/Brady/McNabb.

Then I would flip them the bird from my luxury box during my routine playoff apperances.

I would argue, Oldfan, that the biggest gamble is NOT to draft talent at the QB position. You simply cannot win in the NFL today on a consistent basis without a marquee signal caller.

p.s.

by the way, if you want to quote something someone says, type "

" then type their words or paste them, etc., and then type "(/quote)" (except use brackets instead of parentheses)

[TheLongshot]

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.

I don't argue that. I'm just saying it is hard to call someone a bargain after spending three picks on him, that's all.

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).

The basic philosophy of the offense is the same as always. Sure, there were some adjustments, but we still run the counter trey, we still throw the WR screen on a regular basis, and the philosophy is still focused on protection rather than getting a bunch of recievers out. Not that much is different.

Jason

[airborneskins]

zoony writes...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.

Well, we agree that actions speak louder than words, especially with Joe Gibbs. However, his actions demonstrated more faith in Mark Brunell than seemed justified at the time. It boggles the mind to think that he would keep his playbook zipped up because he didn't trust that Mark could handle it.

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?

My point was, as I said, that the move to Musgrave and the shotgun (which he had stubbornly opposed in 2004) were the actions of someone looking for answers...not someone who had a bag of tricks up his sleeve waiting for the right time to spring it on us.

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

I read that too. That's why the quote by the Auburn coach baffled me.

I think it's a high risk move anyway you slice it. If Joe Gibbs is right about draftees one in three times, he'll be the best personnel man in the business. Three picks is too much to give up. It's not as though we don't have other needs to fill.

Oldfan, I know that you are new, but there is a quote button on the bottom right hand corner of each post. Please use it.

Thanks...

HTTR!!

[lunarluau]

Coaching is the biggest difference however you can be the best coach in the world but without talented players you're not going to win consistently. Give Brunell some credit. Gibbs didn't draw up the 25 yard run on 3rd and 27.

[TheLongshot]

However, if I was running an NFL franchise, I would draft a QB in the first round EVERY YEAR until I got a winner.

And I'm not exaggerating... I seriously would. Prognasticators would call me foolish until I hit paydirt and got the next Manning/Vick/Brady/McNabb.

That's pretty much a waste. There are so many places on a team where one could use an impact player. Also, those QBs are usually at the top of the draft, which means to draft them, you'd have to give up picks to move up every year. (Or, be pretty awful.)

Now, I could see drafting at the position often, especially if you don't have the guy. Just not in the first round. Just a reminder, Brady was a 6th round pick.

Jason

[zoony]

That's pretty much a waste.

you and I see a different NFL.

I see an NFL where you cannot win consistently without a quality guy behind center.

I also see an NFL where teams realize this, and are unwilling to part with their marquee guy when they are lucky enough to stumble on him. Do you think Atlanta/Indy/NE/Philly would EVER even CONSIDER trading their QBs? Not in a million years, not for any amount of draft choices.

Good QB's are just too hard to come by, and they are THE key to winning in the NFL. Make no mistake.

The only way to get said QB is to stumble on him in the draft. Your odds are better in the higher rounds... not taking those chances is the biggest risk of all.

Show me a good team without a good QB, and I'll show you the Washington Redskins since Brad Johnson left.

........

[Oldfan]

cchandler write...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.

And if he had finished his career with an offensive coordinator and a supporting cast no better than he had in previous years, we could have drafted him (the same player, same talent) on the seventh round and he's a bargain even if it turns out he has only the potential as a back-up in the NFL

And, if he flops, we didn't risk that much.

[zoony]

cchandler write...

And if he had finished his career with an offensive coordinator and a supporting cast no better than he had in previous years, we could have drafted him (the same player, same talent) on the seventh round and he's a bargain even if it turns out he has only the potential as a back-up in the NFL

And, if he flops, we didn't risk that much.

Once again, you have not seen him play. Seriously, I'm not sure why you won't admit it.

NOBODY who saw Campbell play at Auburn would EVER make a statement like that. Unless they were a fool. But you're not... you are a pretty intelligent guy.

So it is painfully obvious to me and to everyone reading this thread that you simply have not seen JC play.

[TheLongshot]

you and I see a different NFL.

I see an NFL where you cannot win consistently without a quality guy behind center.

I don't think we see it differently at all, just that our methods differ.

You seem to think that the only way you are going to get a franchise QB is to draft one in the first round. That isn't true. Brett Favre was a 2nd round pick. Brady was a 6th round pick. Jake Delhomme wasn't even drafted. All of these players have gone to the big game.

The problem with QBs is that you often don't know if you have a good one until about 3 years in. It requires a lot more resources to get one ready, and typically you can only run one with your starters.

This is why you usually want a QB from the later rounds that you like, because it is insurance if your main guy turns out to be a dud. (ex. Shuler vs Ferotte) Also, if you never use him, but other teams like him, you can get good value for him. (Like Philly getting a second round for AJ Feely.)

The fact is, there isn't one hard and fast rule to getting a quality QB.

Jason

[zoony]

I don't think we see it differently at all, just that our methods differ.

You seem to think that the only way you are going to get a franchise QB is to draft one in the first round. ......

.....

The fact is, there isn't one hard and fast rule to getting a quality QB.

Jason

Absolutely. But I do think your odds are better in the higher rounds. And that is ultimately my point.

.........

[Oldfan]

Oldfan, I know that you are new, but there is a quote button on the bottom right hand corner of each post. Please use it.

I thought my posts were easier to read and follow. I guess you're saying they're not.

Okay, no problem.

[Darth Tater]

The primary reason for Brunell's improvement can be found in something Buges said last year but most of us screamed about how he should worry about the blocking. The receivers are running their patterns, catching the ball and getting open. Adjusting schemes has also helped a lot and Gibbs will continue to adjust his schemes. Health is a factor but Brunell doesn't seem to think its a big one. Even though we are on pace to give up more sacks than last year, I think that comes from the fact that Brunell is now confident enough in the o-line to wait that extra second to allow a reciever to come open while last year, he'd throw it as soon as he could.

Another major factor is confidence. Faith that you can do what you need to do and your team-mates will do what their supposed to do can make an average athlete good while lack of this faith can make a great one, stink.

[Oldfan]

Once again, you have not seen him play. Seriously, I'm not sure why you won't admit it.

NOBODY who saw Campbell play at Auburn would EVER make a statement like that. Unless they were a fool. But you're not... you are a pretty intelligent guy.

So it is painfully obvious to me and to everyone reading this thread that you simply have not seen JC play.

zoony, please don't assume you can speak for everyone reading this thread. I don't seem to be having the problem communicating with them that I have with you.

I really don't have a strong opinion one way or the other on whether Jason Campbell will make it in the NFL because I haven't seen enough of him to form an opinion.

This is my point. No one...not you, not Joe Gibbs, not the best GM in the NFL...can predict with more than 50 percent accuracy who will make it as a bona fide starter in the NFL. Therefore, it is high risk to spend three draft picks for a college QB.

It is much smarter, to select two or three players in the later rounds who did not capture national attention as part of a well-coached, offensive juggernaut like Auburn.

Brady, Farve, Brunell, all Pro Bowl caliber while in their prime, were bargain acquisitions for the Pats, Packers and Jags.

If you use your picks to build a dominant O line first, you don't need a franchise QB to win (Redskins '81 - '91).

[zoony]

zoony, please don't assume you can speak for everyone reading this thread. I don't seem to be having the problem communicating with them that I have with you.

I'm not speaking for anyone at all... other than myself.

BTW, you are communicating just fine. I understand what you are saying. I disagree. That will happen quite a bit on this forum... not sure why you are getting defensive?

If late round talent was as easily identified as you make it out to be, teams would live this way. But they don't. Late round picks are usually a stretch to even make the roster.

Anyways, I think this was a good discussion.

[rvan1]

it has to be a combination of a lot of things, including lack of confidence. Brunell couldnt hit a wide open guy in pregame warmups at the end of last year. thats more than just injury.

[jrockster21]

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.

Uhhh...never had a hamstring injury, have ya? I had a minor hamstring pull, and it severely hobbled me. Its pretty painful every time you push off that leg. You can't run, you have to limp-run.

Mark's hammy was so bad the back of his leg was black and blue. That is a monster hamstring pull. You better believe that affected his performance. Most players sit out with hamstring pulls (see: Chump), but Mark gritted it out and stayed in.

Its really quite obvious...he was injured, and now he's not. His throws last year were ducks on heroin, and his throws this year are zipping in to his receivers. He can scramble this year!

So yeah, the hamstring theory is not a theory...its the facts.

[Oldfan]

So it is painfully obvious to me and to everyone reading this thread that you simply have not seen JC play.

zoony,

It was the foregoing remark which led me to believe you were speaking for others in this thread.

As for misunderstanding me, I assumed you hadn't because my positions are not predicated on any opinion of Jason Campbell's talent.

[Oldfan]

jrockster77...Uhhh...never had a hamstring injury, have ya?

Yeah, I've had 'em. Never one severe enough to quit playing. Painful but not that limiting.

I've never heard of black and blue with a muscle pull of any kind. A severely pulled muscle will spasm and render you immobile.

Mark has said it wasn't that much of a factor. I'll take his word for it. He should know.

I think he looked bad in 2004 because he was under severe pressure. He looked bad off and on and and threw some really crummy passes for the first 55 minutes in Dallas, after all.

[zoony]

zoony,

It was the foregoing remark which led me to believe you were speaking for others in this thread.

As for misunderstanding me, I assumed you hadn't because my positions are not predicated on any opinion of Jason Campbell's talent.

You can try to write your opinion out of Jason Campbell out of the equation... but sorry, it is much to relevant to ignore.

I could buy a 1979 Ford Pinto for $10. But it is a POS. Therefore it is not a good deal. The quality of the subject in discussions of value couldn't be more relevant.

[Oldfan]

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

You're not disagreeing with me. I reported only that his Auburn coach compared Campbell to the kid who replaced him. Campbell being the better athlete, his replacement being the better passer.

I just wondered from that comment if we were wise to give up three picks for the second most accurate Auburn QB.