Kirwan On Campbell

[cnhnyy]

I agree with Art here. JC does bring hope to us, but he has not became Romo sits to pee yet.

In our loss to Bucs (BTW, Bucs won other two games by a combination of three points), JC had 120 yards passing in the first 58 minutes.

In our win against Pathers, JC had 160 yard passing total. I know we won, but we also beat girls, jags at home with Brunel as well. Defense won the game and JC did not blow it for us.

Basically, JC's performance is pretty much Brunell-like (pathetic passing but relatively mistake-free). Remember Brunell QB rating is 87 (8 td/4 ints) before being benched.

I am not saying it was a mistake to start Jason, but some people are acting like we already had a Carson Palmer here. He now is at lesat as good as a 36 yo Brunnell and hopefully he will be much better in future.

[gjshipp]

If our defense had played this inspired all season, Brunnell would still be playing. If the defense gets off the field against Tampa maybe JC has some better numbers who knows. The good thing is we are looking long term instead of quick fix. Romo sits to pee has been in the league 4 yrs, you have time to develop when you are a lower round pick. JC does not have that luxury, 2 yrs from now lets judge how good a QB he is going to be in this league, hopefully our organization will give him time to develop. I will say this I like him better than Grossman, I think his decision making is good even if his throws are a little off, Moss was behind that corner and the safety would not have made it over he just did not lead him enough......

[Octane67]

I am excited about the change of the hum-drum brunell.....

as ART says JC is physically more capable but maybe he does not have the mental awareness of a 15 year veteran, but there are bad things you learn in 15 years or so as well..... such as not taking chances and indecision.....

That first down scramble for what 10+ ?? yards... was unbelieveable...I think I nearly spilled my beer.....(end of 1st Q)

[AUskins]

A QB rating of 92 is how you judge QB play?

Brunell had a 102 rating in a WIN against the Cowboys, where he threw the ball down field and accurately and had people screaming for his head. Tony Romo sits to pee played great against the Bucs. Campbell did not. Want to know how well he played? At halftime, you had a Hall of Fame quarterback clowning on him and the team. I told him, "Sorry Sonny, but, every fan of this team will be thrilled because two passes went more than 10 yards whether complete or not." He seemed surprised fans would be that stupid . But, we are. It's ok we are.

When Campbell consistently completes passes, moves the team, maintains drives and gets points on the board, while putting up more than 190 yards in a GREAT game, we can start actually thinking he's playing great and he's not merely poised or has potential. Right now he's still hope over anything else. That's what we need him to be. He hasn't killed the hope. Let's not pretend he's arrived yet.

I agree with most of what you say, but you say when he moves the team etc and he doesnt control the play calls. If the play calling is to run the ball 3 times for 3 consecutive drives and we dont get first downs that is no reflection on Campbell at all. If he misses passes then thats different.

[Art]

sure he has. its not JC's fault that some perfectly thrown deep passes were dropped by his WR's. Lloyd in the first game and Cooley in the second. both passes were accurate and hit the WR in stride, DEEP. that is what we havent had but now possess.

It was a good ball to Lloyd he should have caught. It was an accurate throw, but horrible decision to throw to Cooley. That ball should never leave the QBs hands. It got there instead of being run down the sideline but that's not a good throw. I love the possibilities in Campbell, but, every single one of you suggesting we've seen anything more than a reason to keep our hope he can play alive is being foolish.

[AUskins]

I agree with Art here. JC does bring hope to us, but he has not became Romo sits to pee yet.

In our loss to Bucs (BTW, Bucs won other two games by a combination of three points), JC had 120 yards passing in the first 58 minutes.

In our win against Pathers, JC had 160 yard passing total. I know we won, but we also beat girls, jags at home with Brunel as well. Defense won the game and JC did not blow it for us.

Basically, JC's performance is pretty much Brunell-like (pathetic passing but relatively mistake-free). Remember Brunell QB rating is 87 (8 td/4 ints) before being benched.

I am not saying it was a mistake to start Jason, but some people are acting like we already had a Carson Palmer here. He now is at lesat as good as a 36 yo Brunnell and hopefully he will be much better in future.

I think it will take time to really see what he can do as well, however you are just looking at stats like many do. We ran the ball alot last week. I think you need to consider how many pass plays were called, how many balls were dropped, how the defense played, how good the pass protection was and use the whole picture to make your assessment. You cant just compare numbers and get an accurate picture.

If the running game is working there will be many fewer passes thrown.

[skinz4evr]

I just wish they'd open up the playbook a little more for him, instead of taking all these baby steps. We'll never know what he can do unless he's given the entire thing. The fact that he called his own play on that Cooley touchdown tells you what kind of athlete he is. Use him!

That's right! I keep thinking about that play and the fact he only knew the formation so called a play from it and look how it turned out. Hell of an effort by everyone on that play. Saunders will get alot of good plays out of him.:notworthy :notworthy

[NotInOurHouse]

A lot of people here are saying well the defense has played good recently and if they played like that with Brunell in there Brunell would win these games. Do any of the same people think that maybe the defense is playing well because they feel they have some hope under center. They maybe thinking that if we can just keep it close JC can win it for us as HE did in the panthers game.

[Uno Mas]

It just seems like Romo sits to pee has gotten so much more pub. It's cool though. In my opinion Jason will eventually be the better of the two.

That wouldnt have anything to do with you being a skins fan, would it?

Come on, man, quit being such a homer. Romo sits to pee has looked as good as anyone in their first 4 or 5 starts.

Its still way to early to tell about either guy, which is why comments like yours are just silly.

Im not picking on you, I just cant stand homerism.

[kevinklein]

I'd say emerging star is a little premature, but he certainly has met, and exceeded our expectations thus far.

[dinzelwashington]

jason is not a media type of guy. he dont have to prove shiet to interviewers.. he just plays his game.. like mike sellers says, nothing bothers this kid... thats why i know we are moving forward. he wont get frustrated by all this media crap. hes a gibbs qb.. dont know why we didnt play him way earlier...

[tspiers]

It was a good ball to Lloyd he should have caught. It was an accurate throw, but horrible decision to throw to Cooley. That ball should never leave the QBs hands. It got there instead of being run down the sideline but that's not a good throw. I love the possibilities in Campbell, but, every single one of you suggesting we've seen anything more than a reason to keep our hope he can play alive is being foolish.

You keep calling people stupid and foolish and using words like horrible. I think your argument skills are horrible and foolish. You point out Campbell's horrible decisions but then you go oh but I love his possibilities.

So in your view, he sucks right now but it's POSSIBLE he might be good. You think Campbell is really inaccurate but you also think that maybe he won't be inaccurate at some point. So is your point that anything's possible. Thanks for that earth shattering discovery. If you're so smart, realize that you're being annoyingly passive agressive with your arguments. Whoever disagrees with you gets something like this in response: "Hey, I think he might be good too but I also think maybe he might not be good. Let's wait until I think I know he's good, then I'll tell you, and I'll be right. Stop making your own decisions, they are foolish and stupid and hey I'm foolish and stupid too because everyone is, we all are you see, ha ha."

Yuck, just tell us what you think, not how to think--you Communist.

And now to counterpoint your argument:

I disagree. The throw to Lloyd would have been a great catch if he caught it, good effort by both players. Cooley was wide open on that play, probably would have scored. He made up for it though bigtime.

And it was that bigtime play which seperates Campbell from Brunell Whatever Brunell has in experience, he lacks in physical skills. He is 6'0 tall and can't run anymore. Same thing happened to Steve Young.

Campbell is at the end of year 2, he looks ready, seems really smart, and has an awesome arm. He reminds me of a really intelligent Randall Cunningham. 6'5 and runs great, good vision, those improv passes when on the run near the end zone are what seperates mediocre QB's from great QB's. I also hope he has lots of 160 yard games. That means Betts and Duckett and Sellars are running wild like last Sunday.

[Taylor 36]

SkinsNoles,

At no point have I suggested I lack awareness in what we have in Campbell. We have hope. We have signs of potential. We have some positive intangibles. I know that's what we have. What we don't have is a QB who makes you excited every series, because, he's not that productive yet. What we haven't had is a QB who has EVER in his two starts as a pro, played as well as our last starter just two starts ago against Dallas.

I do not doubt Campbell can be for real. I merely state he hasn't yet been.

Excellent post and point, Art.:applause:

[Taylor 36]

You keep calling people stupid and foolish and using words like horrible. I think your argument skills are horrible and foolish. You point out Campbell's horrible decisions but then you go oh but I love his possibilities.

So in your view, he sucks right now but it's POSSIBLE he might be good. You think Campbell is really inaccurate but you also think that maybe he won't be inaccurate at some point. So is your point that anything's possible. Thanks for that earth shattering discovery. If you're so smart, realize that you're being annoyingly passive agressive with your arguments. Whoever disagrees with you gets something like this in response: "Hey, I think he might be good too but I also think maybe he might not be good. Let's wait until I think I know he's good, then I'll tell you, and I'll be right. Stop making your own decisions, they are foolish and stupid and hey I'm foolish and stupid too because everyone is, we all are you see, ha ha."

Yuck, just tell us what you think, not how to think--you Communist.

And now to counterpoint your argument:

I disagree. The throw to Lloyd would have been a great catch if he caught it, good effort by both players. Cooley was wide open on that play, probably would have scored. He made up for it though bigtime.

And it was that bigtime play which seperates Campbell from Brunell Whatever Brunell has in experience, he lacks in physical skills. He is 6'0 tall and can't run anymore. Same thing happened to Steve Young.

Campbell is at the end of year 2, he looks ready, seems really smart, and has an awesome arm. He reminds me of a really intelligent Randall Cunningham. 6'5 and runs great, good vision, those improv passes when on the run near the end zone are what seperates mediocre QB's from great QB's. I also hope he has lots of 160 yard games. That means Betts and Duckett and Sellars are running wild like last Sunday.

At nowhere in your argument did you make anything close to what could be resembled as sense of any magnitude. You should try to actually READ all of Art's posts before butchering common sense.

[onedrop]

It was a good ball to Lloyd he should have caught. It was an accurate throw, but horrible decision to throw to Cooley. That ball should never leave the QBs hands. It got there instead of being run down the sideline but that's not a good throw. I love the possibilities in Campbell, but, every single one of you suggesting we've seen anything more than a reason to keep our hope he can play alive is being foolish.

i never said we had reason for anything but hope. my point is that JC has shown enough to merit that hope.

[LiveStrongSkins]

A QB rating of 92 is how you judge QB play?

Brunell had a 102 rating in a WIN against the Cowboys, where he threw the ball down field and accurately and had people screaming for his head. Tony Romo sits to pee played great against the Bucs. Campbell did not. Want to know how well he played? At halftime, you had a Hall of Fame quarterback clowning on him and the team. I told him, "Sorry Sonny, but, every fan of this team will be thrilled because two passes went more than 10 yards whether complete or not." He seemed surprised fans would be that stupid . But, we are. It's ok we are.

When Campbell consistently completes passes, moves the team, maintains drives and gets points on the board, while putting up more than 190 yards in a GREAT game, we can start actually thinking he's playing great and he's not merely poised or has potential. Right now he's still hope over anything else. That's what we need him to be. He hasn't killed the hope. Let's not pretend he's arrived yet.

We can point to yards and stats all we want, but the truth of the matter he has led the team to two touchdown drives in consecutive games in the 3rd quarter. The last time a Redskin QB did that, it was a jump ball to Moss by PATRICK RAMSEY. Brunell consistently clammed up in the second half of big games. He is timid and scared of the pass rush. We judge Campbell differently because we see courage and a willingness to take a nasty hit in order deliver the ball. And its not all hope, its in the results as well. Maybe not in yards, but in his first two starts he has thrown 4 TD passes and they have all come when the game is on the line in the second half. Looking at that isnt hope, it's fact. He's done something in two games consistently that Brunell has layed an egg on all year. Given more opportunites, he will greatly surpass the output of "our starter against Dallas" Because the starter against Dallas was the same veteran that threw an interception on the first play of the two minute drill against Tenn, and the same QB who threw the ball short of the chains on three consecutibe third and longs against Indy.

(this post isnt attacking your points, its just bringing up some different points to judge Campbell upon. In some aspects, he is being very productive.)

[Art]

tspiers,

Part of posting is to bring posters seemingly with no real sense of what they are seeing into reality. Indeed, Campbell is playing fair (first game) to badly (second game) in reality. Indeed, despite that, he's graded somewhat differently than he would be next year, the year after and so on. He's graded kindly. The positives you want to see from him are reasonable accuracy (which to this point is spotty), the ability to remain composed under pressure (excellent to this point) and the ability to create something when little is there (also excellent to this point).

You are aware he's going to miss easy plays as he has. You're aware he'll be erratic as he has been. You'd like to see some signs he can make all the throws, which goes beyond arm strength as he has the arm to make the throws like Patrick Ramsey did, but, Campbell actually appears ABLE to make them unlike Ramsey because of the ability to pull the string a bit to loft over one level to the next.

As you rightly state, right now, he's not really a big asset to the team, but, he has signs that lead you to believe as he overcomes his limitations -- which for him are inexperience, lack of knowledge and time -- he might well become an excellent player. But, indeed, he might suck it up when teams develop a book on him and the loft he has is a little too soft and gets picked, of the lateness he has in throwing to receivers out of their breaks is never improved and teams can jump routes, or teams discover he can't handle pressure in his face and game plan for it, etc. We don't know Campbell. The league doesn't know Campbell. We won't know much beyond the initial signs for some time.

He could have a 400 yard game and play lights out and we can THEN say he actually has PLAYED great in the league, but we still won't know. He could have 6 interceptions and 100 yards and he'll have played horribly, but we still won't know. Likely not until next year will we know for sure what he'll become. I asked Sonny Jurgenson before the game if we'd know after the game whether Campbell can play in the league or not. Prior to the game Sonny just laughed and said we don't know because no one has seen him play. I'll ask him Sunday what he thinks and let you know.

It is not for anyone here to place false positions in their thinking on Campbell. When they do, it is for someone here to correct them. Campbell hasn't played well yet. He hasn't done anything yet. We're happy SOLELY because we believe he may be an improving product where similar play from Brunell was seen as the top level available. It's fair to be happy that after two games you aren't horribly depressed because Campbell appears to be a complete bum. It's not fair to be happy because you think he's played great as an NFL player yet. He hasn't.

He's played acceptably well FOR A YOUNG QB JUST STARTING OUT. That is pleasing. That is all that is pleasing.

[Art]

i never said we had reason for anything but hope. my point is that JC has shown enough to merit that hope.

I've never said otherwise. I've said his actual play to this point has not been at the level you need it to be to be satisfied with his play. His play to this point has at least matched what we needed it to be to think he can get better.

[Drew_Fl]

it is refreshing to see a young redskin qb getting praise that he deserves in the media

[NotInOurHouse]

I've never said otherwise. I've said his actual play to this point has not been at the level you need it to be to be satisfied with his play. His play to this point has at least matched what we needed it to be to think he can get better.

I consider a 4 to 1 td to int. ratio satsifying from a 24 YEAR OLD. And those touchdowns either put us in striking distance or took to the lead.

[kwitt]

I don't think the majority of people on here are saying that Campbell has "arrived." We are simply excited from what we see and we could use some good news that is for sure.

[onedrop]

I've never said otherwise. I've said his actual play to this point has not been at the level you need it to be to be satisfied with his play. His play to this point has at least matched what we needed it to be to think he can get better.

i agree. i simply did not want to be lumped in with those that seemed to think that JC was already pro-bowl material.

[tspiers]

Campbell hasn't played well yet. He hasn't done anything yet. We're happy SOLELY because we believe he may be an improving product where similar play from Brunell was seen as the top level available. It's fair to be happy that after two games you aren't horribly depressed because Campbell appears to be a complete bum. It's not fair to be happy because you think he's played great as an NFL player yet. He hasn't.

He's played acceptably well FOR A YOUNG QB JUST STARTING OUT. That is pleasing. That is all that is pleasing.

I think he has played well. He looks really calm, gives broken down plays second and third chances for success.

He tosses an interception and two minutes later fires the game winning strike to Cooley.

He makes plays, that's the key, everyone can see that. You're just scared that if you like him too much, he'll break your heart. Well, he will have a bad game, everyone does. But he looks like the type of guy who can toss a few interceptions and still win.

You talk about him as making horrible decisions, missing throws, being inaccurate, being late. I just don't see that at all, I see really good things. I'm not an analyst and can't freeze frame every play, but when you talk about Campbell you sound like you're talking about a young Jake Plummer.

And game tapes on people can't stop improvisers. You can game plan all you want for Donovan McNabb but once he goes out and improvises, he can do anything. Campbell has already shown glimpses he can do that too.

[georgiaredskin]

We can point to yards and stats all we want, but the truth of the matter he has led the team to two touchdown drives in consecutive games in the 3rd quarter.

:notworthy :notworthy :notworthy

(didn't quote the whole post, but I applaud all of it) Those are facts that promote solid hope.

[fpickering]

Actually, no. I thought it was fairly obvious Brunell could not perform to the level we needed because he was so limited physically. I was estatic Campbell was put in. Hell, I even wrote an article on Redskins.com mentioning before the Bucs game how exciting it was for us as fans to enter the game with Campbell playing.

What it ought to be obvious is some people here, you obviously among them, are too stupid to realize while Brunell was physically limited and incapable, Campbell has thusfar been MENTALLY limited and inexperienced, thus, creating largely the same offense we had with Brunell.

I do not agree with your assessment of JC. He has actually exceeded expectations in my humble opinion. He has remained very poised in the pocket and for the most part has made few mental mistakes.

He has done an excellent job of stepping up in the pocket and has brought versatility to the QB position that was much needed. Although I would like to see him improve on his completion percentage, he has thrown 4 TDs to one INT which is very impressive thus far. His ability to scramble for much needed yards has been refreshing being that the alternative with Brunell at the helm would have most likely been a toss out of bounds.

The bottom line is that he has made good decisions for the most part which speaks to his mental capacity. Don't forget that we are without one of the NFL's premiere rushers and Moss has been battling an injury so our offense is no where near it was when Brunell was starting.