Was Gibbs right to sit Campbell?

[ceviker]

Plus, you have to start a quarterback who takes you to the playoffs the year before. It's a rule.

Clint

I guess if that's true, it should DEFINETLY be true to start a QB who won you the Super Bowl. Glad that's true.

Trent Dilfer: "Hey man, that's not true!"

Whoops.

[909997]

it was good when we sat him for a year

[phatboy41]

I think it was good, I think he put him in late this season but I think he benefitted from watching.

[redskin81]

It sure was the right move. We've seen what happens when you rush a young qb. Look at Palmer. He sat and learned and it seemed to work out ok. Gibbs knows a thing or two about qbs and if JC wasnt ready until now then im glad that he didnt get rushed.

[redskin81]

Agreed

After losing too the Titans a blind man could see that Boonell was a handicapp. Starting Jason after that debacle would have been the right

move.

The earth doesnt revolve around Brunells play. If JC wasnt ready I dont care how bad Brunell was playing :doh:

[smitty71]

We may never know what "really" happened to this D between the end of last season and the beginning of this one. It's fallen too far given the continuity it DID have to add up. If they were 15th in the league, even 20th, I'd maybe ascribe it to things like the loss of Clark, who we now learn was a huge part of the chemisty that held the secondary together and another year of age on the DL. At 30th and plummeting, though, I'm convinced there's something else going on--something mental between the players and coaches.

In my view, addressing and fixing THAT is going to be Gibbs' number one priority this off season.

Good Post. To me it also seems that GW has taken it much easier on the D to the press this year compared to last. He seems much more defensive of the players. I know the coaches like to protect the players but I fear that this new "softness" may have spread into the practices. They just look so flat and emotionless when they take the field.

Apparantly, George Michael said Joe Gibbs lit into the players today though, so maybe they have had enough.

Any thoughts?

[woodbridge kid]

People say that he should have started earlier, but there is one good reason why it was better to wait.

There is no pressure on him to have to win games.

We all know the season is pretty much lost, so right now, winning games is icing on the cake. So, he can go out there and just run the offense and see where it takes him. And, if we lose, it most likely won't be on his head.

Jason

yeah, your right...i'm just dissapointed because my hopes were so high for this year......in the end Gibbs will probably get the last laugh, Campbell will lead us to the playoffs next year, and Brunell will come of the bench to win a key victory,,,Gibbs has got it like that!.....keep the faith!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Ghost of]

I love it, the same cats probably thought Ramsey wasn't "Ready" until that Bengals game. Fact is, this is TWICE now the same thing has happened (terrible BRunell replaced by younger guy) and both times there exists no reason to believe that the switch couldn't have been made earlier.

Unless, of course, one believes that you wait until the guy who is clearly wrecking your season has led you to just out of playoff contention to bench him, giving the other guy no chance to build momentum and MAYBE make the playoff run.

[robotfire]

I guess if that's true, it should DEFINETLY be true to start a QB who won you the Super Bowl. Glad that's true.

Trent Dilfer: "Hey man, that's not true!"

Whoops.

I think Brunell earned the starting spot by his play last year. Dilfer rode a defense to the Super Bowl (and I still say you shouldn't make any major changes after a Super Bowl year, even if it is Dilfer). Brunell really did have a great season last year. You can cry all you want about the 120 yards of offense in that Bucs game, but Portis didn't do anything in that game, either. Are you saying he wasn't a part of the playoff run, either?

In my mind, Brunell was a positive part of Redskins history.

[Thinking Skins]

sitting Campbell makes Gibbs a genius. We sat through such BAD play from Brunell, that no matter how bad Campbell is, we'll always resort to at least he's not Brunell.

Plus Campbell saw all the mistakes a QB makes, so Gibbs could say to him "This is how NOT to play QB". And now whenever Cambpell messes up, Gibbs can say, "OK Jason, you're getting like Brunell. You dont want me to call you another Brunell do you".

Thats instant inspiration to get better and be the best QB ever.

Its the same kind of coaching that Norv Turner used on Gus Ferotte. Norv played Heath Shuler, and Shuler was so aweful that Gus said, "I don't want to look like that, Please tell me if I'm ever doing that bad". Then we went on to have a Pro-Bowl QB.

Yeah, Joe Gibbs is a genius in the same line of genius as Norv Turner.

[chipman5544]

I think Brunell can have the same role in Skins history as perhaps Brad Johnson. Comes in a couple of years and gets us to the playoffs the only thing about Johnson was that he didn't start losing a bunch of games and got benched.

[scruffylookin]

I think Brunell can have the same role in Skins history as perhaps Brad Johnson. Comes in a couple of years and gets us to the playoffs the only thing about Johnson was that he didn't start losing a bunch of games and got benched.

Difference is that Brad Johnson was actually a key reason why we made the playoffs in 1999. Brunell was just along for the ride as just about everyone else picked up the slack and carried this team into the postseason and even got us a win in Tampa when our passing game looked like it was on the same level as the Pop Warner League.

With Ramsey still on the team, there was no question that Campbell was going to "redshirt" his rookie season. The mistake that I feel that was made was in going into this season with Brunell as the unquestioned starter. He had done nothing to earn that distinction. We invested a ton in Jason Campbell and one would think that the Redskins would have done everything in their power to try and get him ready to start the 2006 season.

There should have been an open competition for the starting job and Jason should have gotten an equal amount of work in training camp with the starters and then actually started a couple of preseason games working against 1st string defenses.

Bottom line is, if Jason Campbell was not "ready" until last week (something that I simply do not believe by the way), then the fault lies with the coaches in not trying to get him ready to take over.

As others have said, if Gibbs had his druthers, Mark Brunell would still be our starting quarterback right now, and to me that is very sad.

[matty dread]

I guess we'll never really know for sure, but my bet is he wasn't ready to play at the beginning of this season. Brunell struggled mightily in picking up the new system so it's safe to assume that Campbell would have also struggled if he played earlier.

At the end of the day it's a moot point anyway. He's the starter now so let's look forward to the future rather than worrying about the past.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I think Brunell can have the same role in Skins history as perhaps Brad Johnson. Comes in a couple of years and gets us to the playoffs the only thing about Johnson was that he didn't start losing a bunch of games and got benched.

Brad Johnson was actually a good QB in 1999 and could have been the QB for five or six seasons if Snyder did not have such a hard-on for Jeff George.

I don't think Brunell has a Super Bowl title in his future whereas Johnson later won the big game.

And for the record, you will never convince me that JC was more "ready" in Week 10 than he would have been in Week 1. I have no problem with sitting the guy his first year. But those ten weeks of holding a clipboard and not getting reps in practice probably hurt him more than they helped him.

[Guest Rafterman]

Gibb's continues to be a day late and a dollar short in his second go round.

Campbell needed to start this season.

At the very least after the Titans game, when it was obvious too a blind man that Boonell was a handicapp.

The game has passed Gibbs by, the question is, can he catch up?

Case in point, that little talk he had with the players should have taken place weeks ago.

[redman]

The earth doesnt revolve around Brunells play. If JC wasnt ready I dont care how bad Brunell was playing :doh:

Exactly.

What we know was that Campbell didn't understand this playbook as late as the start of the season. That was barely a month before that Titans game. Further, we've had plenty of other problems on this team.

Campbell's development has been handled masterfully. He's clearly well-prepared to QB in this league thanks to Gibbs and Co. We have zero guarantee that he'd have had the same level of preparation earlier in the year.

I'd liken this criticism to my situation with my wife - I'd have love to met and fallen in love with her earlier in my life, but the truth is that neither of us was really at a point in our lives where that would have been possible until it actually happened; in fact we both think that had we met five years earlier it would have fallen apart.

Be happy that we have a good young QB learning the ropes and apparently learning well. It's still very early in the process, and two weeks of poor performances may have us all laughing at the idea of starting him earlier.

[bubba9497]

Exactly.

What we know was that Campbell didn't understand this playbook as late as the start of the season. That was barely a month before that Titans game. Further, we've had plenty of other problems on this team.

Campbell's development has been handled masterfully. He's clearly well-prepared to QB in this league thanks to Gibbs and Co. We have zero guarantee that he'd have had the same level of preparation earlier in the year.

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

a very intelligent point

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Exactly.

Campbell's development has been handled masterfully. He's clearly well-prepared to QB in this league thanks to Gibbs and Co. We have zero guarantee that he'd have had the same level of preparation earlier in the year.

Yea...if we had thrown him in earlier we might be 3-7 or something.

Moreover, it's hard to call his handling masterful after one game...a game in which we lost. We thought Ramsey was headed to Hall of Fame after one game.

I still find it hard to believe that a QB can get dramatically better in six weeks without taking snaps. I think the Campbell we saw this week is the same Campbell we would have seen in October.

[redman]

Yea...if we had thrown him in earlier we might be 3-7 or something.

Moreover' date=' it's hard to call his handling masterful after one game...a game in which we lost. We thought Ramsey was headed to Hall of Fame after one game.

I still find it hard to believe that a QB can get dramatically better in six weeks without taking snaps. I think the Campbell we saw this week is the same Campbell we would have seen in October.[/quote']

What you find hard to believe may not be a very reliable guide. There were multiple sources telling us that Campbell didn't have the playbook down when the season started. Don't you find it just as hard to believe that Campbell got dramatically more mastery of the playbook in far less time than six weeks?

People advocating your position (and I don't know if this applies to you) seem to have a very rigid concept of a QB's learning curve: "if they play, they learn; if they don't play, they don't learn." I would think that this year of all years, with Phillip Rivers dominating in San Diego and Tony Romo sits to pee taking the league by storm, would be one in which that idea was thoroughly debunked.

Besides, Jason Campbell himself has said that he benefitted from the time watching too. Do you find that hard to believe?

[Guest Rafterman]

Yea...if we had thrown him in earlier we might be 3-7 or something.

Moreover' date=' it's hard to call his handling masterful after one game...a game in which we lost. We thought Ramsey was headed to Hall of Fame after one game.

I still find it hard to believe that a QB can get dramatically better in six weeks without taking snaps. I think the Campbell we saw this week is the same Campbell we would have seen in October.[/quote']

EXACTLY

Poise under pressure is not taught, it's like arm strength, a QB either has it or he doesn't.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

What you find hard to believe may not be a very reliable guide. There were multiple sources telling us that Campbell didn't have the playbook down when the season started. Don't you find it just as hard to believe that Campbell got dramatically more mastery of the playbook in far less time than six weeks?

People advocating your position (and I don't know if this applies to you) seem to have a very rigid concept of a QB's learning curve: "if they play, they learn; if they don't play, they don't learn." I would think that this year of all years, with Phillip Rivers dominating in San Diego and Tony Romo sits to pee taking the league by storm, would be one in which that idea was thoroughly debunked.

Besides, Jason Campbell himself has said that he benefitted from the time watching too. Do you find that hard to believe?

I think every QB is different. But, no, I don't think that an extra six weeks gave Campbell a "mastery" of the system. I also don't think he has a "mastery" of it now.

To be honest, outside of Peyton Manning, I don't think there are many QBs with a "mastery" of their systems. I think there are QBs who can play, and QBs who can't play. Ben Roethlisberger has said that during his first year in the league, he knew what the primary receiver did on each play, and tht was it. If that guy was covered, he improvised. And he made next to no mistakes that year.

This year, he probably actually has something close to a "mastery" of their system. And he is making more mistakes than ever.

I also think that the QBs who don't have a "mastery of the system" never develop it. I don't care how they are coached. Kyle Boller never did.

Basically, I think Jason Campbell can play football. And I think we would have seen largely the same results six weeks ago.

The QBs who struggle early in their careers struggles because they panic mostly. If they stop panicking - like Alex Smith - they can eventually become good. I don't think Campbell would have been panicking in Week 6.

[CustomApparelDirect]

I say yes, because he came out of the incubator looking solid. I think it was the right move to give him time to develop. You could argue that he probably would have been just fine earlier on, but Campbell himself doesn't agree. He said that sitting for the first half of the season has helped him a lot.

Plus, you have to start a quarterback who takes you to the playoffs the year before. It's a rule.

Clint

LAST Year?!? Maybe.

Beyond Week 2 of THIS Year?!? "I DON'T Think So"!?! :doh:

Brunell has been a 'HAS BEEN' for OVER 5 YEARS!?! :doh: :mad:

MB's 'Won-Loss' Record during this period "Says It ALL"!!! :doh: :mad:

[Geoff_K]

I would say he was right, up until the season appeared to be over. then it was spot on to let the kid get some reps in a full speed setting.

[AzSkinsFan63]

Great question. All kinds of angles there.

Yeah think about it a little..you have a top notch defense for a couple of years and your offense all of a suddent looks terrific this season in training camp. you think you have it figured out and BAM...the real problem is the defense did a 180....

Damn..Damn..Damn...

[The extremist]

I think he was, i don't agree of his handling of playing time for JC during trash time. I understand he didn't want to undermine (sp?) MB, but JC had a ton of opportunities this year to get in a game and that would have proven to be invaluable in maturation process.

+1