Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

QB Thread - ***WARNING*** Man Crushes Are Abundant Here : )

TK

By TK
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

Monks04

Monks04

Posted
Posted

I agree, the kid looks good. I wish our defense could have given him more time on the field.

Greg Williams had better start earning his money. We have just about the same personnel on defense as we did last year but they can not stop the running game at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IHOPSkins

IHOPSkins

Posted
Posted
Funny how your comments about Campbell quickly turn to the Skin's Defense.:doh:

If Brunell put up 17 points, all of you would be pissed!

Agree

JC will get a honeymoon by the Brunell Bashers but....

JC needs time to develop...I know this

Do the "Future is Now" people know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aghar

Aghar

Posted
Posted

He looked ok. It could have been worse and it could have ben better. He threw a few bad passes, to be expected and he made a few that should have been caught(unexpected). All in all I would give him a B grade for his first outing. I still say, as I have been from day one with these QBs and this offense that the playcalling needs to change up. One pass deep and then nothing the rest of the game? Why? I know what we used to say, Brunell can't throw deep, so that;s why we only looked downfield once all game. Now the kid makes a nice throw, his first throw, and then what? No deep looks. :whoknows:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Enter Apotheosis

Enter Apotheosis

Posted
Posted
I didn't say he was horrible. He needed to hit that easy pass to Randle El in the 4th and didn't. He had some passes that were 5 yards off. He hasn't played, but is still a professional quarterback. Since he did miss open receivers, I think he did look like Brunell in that aspect. In JC's defense, he only had a few chances on the field since the D camped out on the field all day.

Here's the difference. Brunell never SAW his open receivers whereas Campbell's vision wasn't the problem. He simply missed on the throw a bit. It's also hard to compare him to Brunell in that he actually looked downfield before throwing to his checkdown receivers and had a lot more success in doing so.

The finish of the game was mop up time. The game was not in question.

You have to be kidding me. 10 points with over 2:00 left in the game is NOT mop-up time. If we had recovered that onside kick, it was likely we were going to overtime with the momentum on our side.

He also short hops WAY too many passes. He did that in the pre-season as well. I personally do not see a rocket arm on him, but time will tell.

True, he does throw some short and he also threw some high balls. Nonetheless, he had a LOT of passes that were dead-on or hit the receiver in stride. If you don't see that he has an arm on him, you're clearly out of your mind. All of his balls have a bit of an arc on them, but they are by no means indicative of a lack of an arm. Just look at that first pass... beautiful, deep, and right on target

Link to comment
Share on other sites
phishisthegreatstuff

phishisthegreatstuff

Posted
Posted

anyone who doesn't think campbell played great doesn't know anything about football. It was his first start PEOPLE!! He threw 2 tds no picks. He was composed and threw some very nice balls. Getting sacked and still threw a sick pass to trash, sick td pass to cooley, and at the end of the game sick td pass to the TE # 87. Yes he threw a couple passes low and 1 or 2 high but he was GOOD. OUR defense lost us that game 100%... tb possessed the ball for a redic amount more than us and we just couldnt' get that ball back...HAIL TO JASON CAMPBELL

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MABfan

MABfan

Posted
Posted
funny how you have no faith. We put up 17 on a decent TB defense. No portis OR Moss and a toddler QB. Campbell outplayed Brunell this week in game 1. TB time of possession had to have been40 minutes and we still put up 17 which would have probably been at least 20 if lloyd pulls in that bomb

No faith? Am I a jackass too?

What shall I have faith in? How about faith in the fact that every skin fan on this site will put this loss on every player except Campbell. If only we had Moss, if only we had Portis, if only Lloyd could catch better, if only our D played better...blah blah blah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
XxSpearheadxX

XxSpearheadxX

Posted
Posted
No faith? Am I a jackass too?

What shall I have faith in? How about faith in the fact that every skin fan on this site will put this loss on every player except Campbell. If only we had Moss, if only we had Portis, if only Lloyd could catch better, if only our D played better...blah blah blah.

Who the hell are you and what game were you watching? Do you go to church with Mark Brunell or something, whats your deal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Supreme Wu

Supreme Wu

Posted
Posted

It's sad how many stupid fans the Skins have, and how many of them find their way to this board. I guess thats the price for being the official board.

Campbell had no Portis, he had no Moss. He still out performed Brunell on the road. There is no comparison.

I think some genius said that the finish of the game was 'mop up'.

Yeah, just stop trying to discuss football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beastman

beastman

Posted
Posted

Not to mention there was at least half a dozen plays Campbell made today that Brunell couldn't even dream of making. Oh, and if Brunell had been playing, you could have expected to see 8-10 passes thrown out of bounds because he's too scared to let his recievers make a play. Campbell played better in this game than Brunell has all year.

And for the guy who said he was pissed because Tony Romo sits to pee played better in his first start than Campbell...wow. Forget the fact that Romo sits to pee has been #2 behind Bledsoe for over two years now, meaning he actually gets to play in practice, whereas Campbell has been #3 for two years and had approximately one week and a couple days including the time during the bye week when Brunell was hurt of practice to get ready for his first NFL start. Forget that Romo sits to pee has TO and Terry Glenn to throw to, not Brandon Lloyd and Randle-El, forget that Romo sits to pee has a legit running game to support him, and forget that Romo sits to pee has a very good defense helping him out. In Romo sits to pee's first start the Cowboys held the ball for 38 minutes. Today the Skins had the ball for 24 minuntes. That a difference of over 14 minutes, meaning at least two possessions. You give Campbell two more possessions the way he was playing today, and he probably adds another 75-100 yds passing and maybe another TD to his stat line, and you might be able to chalk up a Redskins victory.

The defense and the lack of a running game, be it the backs fault or the coaches falut, lost this game. Campbell kept us in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChettEye

ChettEye

Posted
Posted

What's wrong with loyal fans venting their frustration on a loss?

Regardless, we know the future looks good for this kid because he wants to be in there. Almost 2 seasons on the bench seems to have a been a maturation process. I don't really know what the rest of you saw, but I saw a young, mobile, well armed, accurate passer. I'm more than content.:helmet: :cheers: :2cents:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aghar

Aghar

Posted
Posted

172 yards of total offense ( + 80 in the last meaningless drive ) does not exactly make a GREAT QB. He was ok. He showed some promise. I liked how he stepped up to make throws, wasn't afraid of the rush, etc. But to call him our next fanchise QB is nothing short of stretching it.

I understand how the Brunell bashers instantly turn from" The three and outs would give the defense some time to get fresh" one week, to " this defense sucked and lost the gave for #17", but try to be a little less obvious... :logo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DeoreDX

DeoreDX

Posted
Posted
No faith? Am I a jackass too?

What shall I have faith in? How about faith in the fact that every skin fan on this site will put this loss on every player except Campbell. If only we had Moss, if only we had Portis, if only Lloyd could catch better, if only our D played better...blah blah blah.

Did Campbell do something that cost the Skins the game or was ineffective to the point that you would put the loss on his shoulders?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Supreme Wu

Supreme Wu

Posted
Posted

By the way when we say 'no Portis', we mean 'NO RUNNING GAME'.

The Skins had no ground game at all. It was pathetic.

When we say 'No Moss', we mean 'NO DEEP THREAT'. Cooley was the deepest receiver on several plays. The friggin tight end!

Moss and Portis are elite players at their position. You can't dismiss their absense as if it were a pair of scrubs. They are 80 percent of our offense!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aghar

Aghar

Posted
Posted
By the way when we say 'no Portis', we mean 'NO RUNNING GAME'.

The Skins had no ground game at all. It was pathetic.

When we say 'No Moss', we mean 'NO DEEP THREAT'. Cooley was the deepest receiver on several plays. The friggin tight end!

Moss and Portis are elite players at their position. You can't dismiss their absense as if it were a pair of scrubs. They are 80 percent of our offense!

80% because Brunell can't throw to anyone but Moss or dumpoffs to portis, right? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...