Is Gibbs kicking himself yet??

[TC]

I realize that Jason Campbell has only played one game, which they did not win....

However, no one can deny how much better the offense looked with him in there. JC needs to work on his accuracy a little bit, but his presence and poise were absolutely amazing. It definitely didn't look like his first game.

JC already looks as good if not better than Brunell has all season. I'm happy but I'm also concerned with the decision Gibbs made not to play him earlier in the season. I'm not much of a Gibbs basher but I have to say that if Campbell continues to improve (which I believe he will) then he's going to look pretty dumb for not turning to him sooner.

[Burgold]

Brunell wasn't the problem. He just wasn't the solution. Brunell was perfect for a ball control team with a first class defense. I wanted Campbell long ago too, but there were enough mistakes going on around Brunell that Gibbs choice was vindicated. As well as Campbell did, they still were only allowed on the field long enough to score 17 points. Campbell was the right decison and if I had owned the hook, I would have done it at the Dallas game, but the losses were a team effort.

[@DCGoldPants]

I think Gibbs would have rather played Mark still.

[alcoach]

gibbs should be 2nd guessing himself. Late last year the o-fence was scoring 30+ points a game now switch to a different o-fense and the adjustment were not pick up by the players . the D-fense is the reason the record is not where it should right now. i think this could be a 2 year hole to dig out of ...let begin to look for the 2008 season.

[SonnyRules]

It's over, done with, time to move on....Please Stop:

[AJ_Skins]

I think what Gibbs took out of that game was the fact that he was right...it wasn't the QB holding the team back. Campbell did not make a difference.

[TC]

Brunell wasn't the problem. He just wasn't the solution.

So exactly what is something that is not a problem or a solution? Seems like the type of thing that would need some attention to me.....Are you a politician? :laugh:

I'm not saying the win loss record would be different if Campbell had started the year (although I do believe it would be). This D is playing like crap. I admit that. However, even the blindest fan could not honestly believe that Brunell would have played better than Campbell yesterday.

The fact of the matter is that nearly EVERYONE (fans, sportswriters, GM's, etc) except Joe Gibbs saw Brunell as a liability long ago. It's disappointing that our HOF coach took so long to see that.

[Burgold]

So exactly what is something that is not a problem or a solution? Seems like the type of thing that would need some attention to me.....Are you a politician? :laugh:

The problem is the team. It's the o-line. It's the running backs not moving the pile or breaking tackles. It's the receivers not making that game changing catch or some of the chain moving ones. It's the defense laying down. It's the undisciplined blah we've become. It's allowing 15 play, 90 yard drives multiple times a game as if it's that's the norm.

Brunell aggravated me with his unwillingness to challenge opposing defenses, but he is at least fifty percent scapegoat.

[TC]

It's over, done with, time to move on....Please Stop:

WTF are you talking about? Campbell played the first game of his professional career yesterday. If he had come out and looked like crap then there wouldn't even be a reason for this post. The fact is that he provided a spark for this team that Brunell couldn't.

This horse just died yesterday, buddy. Just wait and see what the media does to Gibbs for this if Campbell continues to progress.

[gortiz]

I can't wait to read the post when JC looks less the 1/2 as good against a Carolina D that has something to play for and Julius Peppers.

I'm as stoked about JC's performance as anyone, but I think it was a mirage. He will not play good this sunday. And it will be due to lack of experience and supporting cast, not skills.

So no, joe is not kicking himself because Joe knows the kid will be in a world of trouble this Sunday...sucks, but true.

[nyfan]

Maybe Joe waited until JC was ready to play and that is why JC looked good. I also noticed there was not as much motion prior to the ball being snapped.

[Trillskinsfan]

I think Gibbs would have rather played Mark still.

me too

MB plz retire

i never want to see MB starting for the REDSKINS:doh:

[TC]

I can't wait to read the post when JC looks less the 1/2 as good against a Carolina D that has something to play for and Julius Peppers.

I'm as stoked about JC's performance as anyone, but I think it was a mirage. He will not play good this sunday. And it will be due to lack of experience and supporting cast, not skills.

So no, joe is not kicking himself because Joe knows the kid will be in a world of trouble this Sunday...sucks, but true.

I can't believe this post. I was full of doom and gloom myself with Brunell at the helm but I honestly can't imagine why anyone would be so negative right now after seeing the potential JC has.

I understand your rationale (I guess), but don't agree with your prediction.

[CustomApparelDirect]

So exactly what is something that is not a problem or a solution? Seems like the type of thing that would need some attention to me.....Are you a politician? :laugh:

I'm not saying the win loss record would be different if Campbell had started the year (although I do believe it would be). This D is playing like crap. I admit that. However, even the blindest fan could not honestly believe that Brunell would have played better than Campbell yesterday.

The fact of the matter is that nearly EVERYONE (fans, sportswriters, GM's, etc) except Joe Gibbs saw Brunell as a liability long ago. It's disappointing that our HOF coach took so long to see that.

"Exactamundo", Compadre! :doh:

[TheLongshot]

I think what Gibbs took out of that game was the fact that he was right...it wasn't the QB holding the team back. Campbell did not make a difference.

Rare for me to agree with AJ_Skins, but I do. Really, Campbell's performance wasn't that much different from Brunell. Campbell made some plays and missed some others. We weren't consistantly moving the ball, and if it wasn't for the late drive, his stat line would have looked very similar to most of Brunell's games.

I mean, Campbell had 50 yards in the first half.

There is no doubt that Campbell shows potential, and that he has better natural abilities. But, that didn't make much of a difference in the game, which tells me that other things are a problem, like the lack of a consistant running game, and a defense that can't get off the field.

Jason

[skins4eva]

Rare for me to agree with AJ_Skins, but I do. Really, Campbell's performance wasn't that much different from Brunell. Campbell made some plays and missed some others. We weren't consistantly moving the ball, and if it wasn't for the late drive, his stat line would have looked very similar to most of Brunell's games.

I mean, Campbell had 50 yards in the first half.

There is no doubt that Campbell shows potential, and that he has better natural abilities. But, that didn't make much of a difference in the game, which tells me that other things are a problem, like the lack of a consistant running game, and a defense that can't get off the field.

Jason

You people really have the blinders on. If Brunell had started that game, final score 24-0. Campbell brought an entirely new element to the redskins offense--a down the field passing game. Those of you who refuse to acknowledge that really make me wonder. Are you actually watching the games? Stats are never the story in football, and yet you throw them out to show that Brunell and Campbell are similar. Campbell was missing PORTIS and MOSS!!!!!!!!! Are you serious?

[kovachs]

Campbell is playing without Portis and Moss and it's his FIRST game ever getting on the field. So to say that he played the same as Brunell is actually very positive and he should improve as he gets more comfortable.

[jaydub]

you know what?... the colts have a bad defense and they are 9-1. all year long our offence gave our defense nothing to work with. how many times would we be in the red zone and have to kick a field goal with MB? JC (although its only been 1 game) has shown us that he has the poise and the mobility to get a touch down in the redzone. We bring something diffrent to the table with him in the game. Once teams see he has the ability to throw the deep ball they have to respect that. Wait till he has a healthy CP and SM lined up with him like MB had and you will really see a diffrence.

[bryanjr2003]

we got to run the ball more and more and more to keep our sorry (ur word here) defense off the field. Run forest run run the damn ball

[Neophyte]

I think what Gibbs took out of that game was the fact that he was right...it wasn't the QB holding the team back. Campbell did not make a difference.

I would point out that Campbell had help not making a difference. That pass to Lloyd to open the game was nearly perfect and Lloyd dropped it. We gave that kid too much money for him to be dropping balls like that.

And it was a better deep ball than I have seen Brunell throw all season.

I mean, Campbell had 50 yards in the first half.

There is no doubt that Campbell shows potential, and that he has better natural abilities. But, that didn't make much of a difference in the game, which tells me that other things are a problem, like the lack of a consistant running game, and a defense that can't get off the field.

For the first half stat line please see my comment above about Lloyd dropping that opening pass.

And there has never been a doubt that other things were also wrong with this team like the play selection and the defense not stopping anyone. I did not expect those to go away yesterday, at least not entirely. I thought the play selection might get better because Campbell has the arm to use more of the deep patterns that Saunders offense needs to open up the whole field but alas, it did not help the running game.

I would also note that while Campbell's stat line may not be any better than Brunell's, Jason managed to post it without the aid of Portis or Moss who are arguably our best two players on offense. Brunell was rarely without either and never without both, yet numbers like Jason's on Sunday were his norm.

Just a thought...

[AUskins]

Rare for me to agree with AJ_Skins, but I do. Really, Campbell's performance wasn't that much different from Brunell. Campbell made some plays and missed some others. We weren't consistantly moving the ball, and if it wasn't for the late drive, his stat line would have looked very similar to most of Brunell's games.

I mean, Campbell had 50 yards in the first half.

There is no doubt that Campbell shows potential, and that he has better natural abilities. But, that didn't make much of a difference in the game, which tells me that other things are a problem, like the lack of a consistant running game, and a defense that can't get off the field.

Jason

So Campbell=Brunell is what you are saying?

[AJ_Skins]

You people really have the blinders on. If Brunell had started that game, final score 24-0. Campbell brought an entirely new element to the redskins offense--a down the field passing game. Those of you who refuse to acknowledge that really make me wonder. Are you actually watching the games? Stats are never the story in football, and yet you throw them out to show that Brunell and Campbell are similar. Campbell was missing PORTIS and MOSS!!!!!!!!! Are you serious?

He did throw more passes down the field...but none of them were complete.

[skins4eva]

He did throw more passes down the field...but none of them were complete.

I'm really not going to get into the differences with you...if you couldn't tell how much better Campbell was in his first NFL start on the road without two pro bowl players in the lineup, it's not worth the time.

[CustomApparelDirect]

I realize that Jason Campbell has only played one game, which they did not win....

However, no one can deny how much better the offense looked with him in there. JC needs to work on his accuracy a little bit, but his presence and poise were absolutely amazing. It definitely didn't look like his first game.

JC already looks as good if not better than Brunell has all season. I'm happy but I'm also concerned with the decision Gibbs made not to play him earlier in the season. I'm not much of a Gibbs basher but I have to say that if Campbell continues to improve (which I believe he will) then he's going to look pretty dumb for not turning to him sooner.

How 'bout keeping BRUNELL as The 'STARTER' for "TWO & ONE-HALF YEARS" - effectively "TANKING / HINDERING" our TEAM's chances at success!!!

In 2004 - with that #1 (finished @ #3) DEFENSE: Kept BRUNELL in, OVER Ramsey!?! :mad: :doh:

In 2005 - SAME Thing!?! :mad: :doh:

In 2006 - Started Brunell OVER Collins (who would have "HELD-DOWN The Fort until CAMPBELL was 'READY' - say, Week #2, or #3, or #4)!?! :mad: :doh: :yikes: :cry: :gang: :shot: :readnews: :geek: :hammer: :obvious: :rant: :slap: :cuss: :doh1: :thud: :yawnee: :whoknows: :owned: :stfu: :bsflag: :coach: :moon: :whippin: :paranoid: :nutkick: :whip: :stick: :soapbox: :kungfu: :pimp: :jerk: :dunce: :ahhhhh: :handicap: :confused: :idea: :shhh: :fortune: :insane: :poke: :censored: :twitch: :toilet: :banhim: :koolaid: :2drunks: :finger: :redpunch: :gus:

[helptheSKINS]

now that's a good post