Om Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 The 25th pick I'm sorry. Good to hear from you buddy. He posted those numbers behind a vicious ground attack. Betts was pounding the hell out of the ball which open up the way for Campbell to produce those numbers. Man I just posted my 100th post. Or, maybe Betts and the vicious ground attack were beneficiaries of defenses having to actually defend the pass again once Campbell established that they could no longer stack 8 or 9 in the box with impunity without exposing themselves down the field. Bottom line, Campbell did a pretty damn good job under very difficult circumstances, showed steady progress and enough sustained flashes of excellence to have earned the benefit of the doubt heading into '07 as the starter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyber Pimp Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 You do realize that one of the reasons the running game improved under Campbell was that Cambell had the threat of being mobile in the pocket and throwing deep?Nobody in the league respects whatever Brunell has left, they know that he does not use the middle of the field, that he is flat out afraid to take a hit and often creates pressure himself with happy feet, and that he checks down immediately.... This arguement about Brunell being better than Campbell b/c Brunell was doing it without a running game is in part based on a faulty premise. Teams knew how to gameplan for Brunell and didn't respect him enough to back off on looking run 1st. It's the same thing that happened in '04...how Clinton even managed 1300 yards that season is beyond me-since 9 guys were looking for him on every snap. Brunell is done....as a backup he's borderline, but it's insanity to even think of trotting him out there again as a starter. All I'm saying is that he wasnt impressive to me. He has great upside. He is a better long term qb then brunell. If JC dosent produce to everyones expectations. How will you feel? Will the Danny boy get rid of him attitude come out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XxSpearheadxX Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Yeah, like the Eagles...oh, wait. :doh: That's right, they had a veteran QB who lead them to the playoffs through a division title. :laugh: You are planning on playoffs withJC? How about just winning some games and not being an embarrassment, I'll take that and be surprised! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XxSpearheadxX Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 There's a difference between vet, and old man. Brunell is a slow old man who is afraid to take a hit. He isn't a viable backup qb for anymore than a game. I am willing to bet that if you took a poll of NFL gms around the league, of who they would rather have start 3 games NEXT YEAR, you would receive 31 Matt Schaubs. There are 32 teams in the league but, uhm, we don't have a GM. :laugh::applause: Great post man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#98QBKiller Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Or, maybe Betts and the vicious ground attack were beneficiaries of defenses having to actually defend the pass again once Campbell established that they could no longer stack 8 or 9 in the box with impunity without exposing themselves down the field. I think this is the point that people are missing when they try and use Betts' success in the ground game late in the season as a reason why Jason looked better out there than Mark did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fwo40 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Or, maybe Betts and the vicious ground attack were beneficiaries of defenses having to actually defend the pass again once Campbell established that they could no longer stack 8 or 9 in the box with impunity without exposing themselves down the field.Bottom line, Campbell did a pretty damn good job under very difficult circumstances, showed steady progress and enough sustained flashes of excellence to have earned the benefit of the doubt heading into '07 as the starter. Usually good to be on the same page as you OM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyber Pimp Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 I think this is the point that people are missing when they try and use Betts' success in the ground game late in the season as a reason why Jason looked better out there than Mark did. The more I read these posts. The more I see a lot of people on here never played any football. Why would you stack 8 or 9 people in the box against SM, BL and ARE. Teams used the cover two to take away our passing game. CP missed the first two games and was never 100%. We ended up passing the ball a lot more then running the first half of the season. There was no need to stack the box because we were barly running the f***ing ball. What games were you guys watching? You guys watch games and are fans but some of you really dont know about the game of football. Ask anyone how to beat a cover two. You have to RUN the ball and make short passes. Defenses were able to use the cover two effectivly because of the lack of a running attack. Let that be your first lesson in football 101. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fwo40 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 All I'm saying is that he wasnt impressive to me. He has great upside. He is a better long term qb then brunell. If JC dosent produce to everyones expectations. How will you feel? Will the Danny boy get rid of him attitude come out? It depends on how long a period of time one's giving him to live up to expectations and whatthose expectations are.... For me, I don't expect Peyton Manning...but I would expect a solid NFL starter in 2-3 full seasons. If Campbell still looked raw and made "rookie" type mistakes after 3 seasons....than I would be of the opinion that he needs replacement....or at least replacement options need to be explored. I like the Redskins the team, I don't have any particulary loyalty to players beyond what they're actually capable of doing for this team on the field. If Campbell struggles, I will acknowledge it...just like when Brunell struggled I acknowledged it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesbondman Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 All we have to do is ask Indianapolis what to do. I am sure they have all their bases covered if Peyton Manning does down, so all we have to do is just check with them and find out what to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyber Pimp Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 It depends on how long a period of time one's giving him to live up to expectations and whatthose expectations are....For me, I don't expect Peyton Manning...but I would expect a solid NFL starter in 2-3 full seasons. If Campbell still looked raw and made "rookie" type mistakes after 3 seasons....than I would be of the opinion that he needs replacement....or at least replacement options need to be explored. I like the Redskins the team, I don't have any particulary loyalty to players beyond what they're actually capable of doing for this team on the field. If Campbell struggles, I will acknowledge it...just like when Brunell struggled I acknowledged it. So you are willing to give JC 2-3 years to develop. But calling for MB head after a few bad games. Were the Defense played poorly, the oline played poorly and there was no presence of a run attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fwo40 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 The more I read these posts. The more I see a lot of people on here never played any football. Why would you stack 8 or 9 people in the box against SM, BL and ARE. Teams used the cover two to take away our passing game. CP missed the first two games and was never 100%. We ended up passing the ball a lot more then running the first half of the season. There was no need to stack the box because we were barly running the f***ing ball. What games were you guys watching? You guys watch games and are fans but some of you really dont know about the game of football. Ask anyone how to beat a cover two. You have to RUN the ball and make short passes. Defenses were able to use the cover two effectivly because of the lack of a running attack. Let that be your first lesson in football 101. Before I enroll in your courses....do you have the stats on running the football in relation to how many times we were behind and by how much in those games? Is it possible that perhaps the effectiveness and the # of carries went up when Campbell was in the lineup was because he made some of the plays that Brunell had us going 3 and out on? Which then allowed the team to stick with the running game the entire game... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fwo40 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 So you are willing to give JC 2-3 years to develop. But calling for MB head after a few bad games. Were the Defense played poorly, the oline played poorly and there was no presence of a run attack. A few bad games this year...a few bad games last season (like Arizona :doh: )....a lot of bad games if not the whole season in 2004... That seems to be the larger part of 3 years right there...at least 2. And with Brunell did you need to see more if he was going to find the fountain of youth and recreate himself? The man's skill set has dwindled...it happens....he's not coming back to form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyber Pimp Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Before I enroll in your courses....do you have the stats on running the football in relation to how many times we were behind and by how much in those games?Is it possible that perhaps the effectiveness and the # of carries went up when Campbell was in the lineup was because he made some of the plays that Brunell had us going 3 and out on? Which then allowed the team to stick with the running game the entire game... What changed was Gibbs started calling more running plays. Al was calling majority passing plays. The change to run the ball changed how defenses played us not JC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morneblade Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 What changed was Gibbs started calling more running plays. Al was calling majority passing plays. The change to run the ball changed how defenses played us not JC. The amount of passes per game were actually about the same for Brunell and Campbell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustangSteve Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Interesting. To me, QB is one of the spots on this team I'm really not worried about at all.By the end of last year, Campbell looked like he was on his way to living up to the expectations I've had of him since we drafted him. In Brunell we have a seasoned vet, slowed, yes, but still capable when healthy. As a backup, he should BE healthy if called upon. And he'll have had a full year under Saunders to learn the system. Collins told us before last season even started it took a full year to learn the system. We should have believed him. And Collins himself appears a capable backup, either as a short-term 2 or a 3. The man knows the O inside and out, and if nothing else could manage it for a few games. The Eagles last year were an exception to the rule. There just aren't many teams with serious playoff aspirations that could suffer a season-ending loss to an elite starter and still live up to expectations. Colts? Pats? Bengals? Saints? Panthers? Steelers? Broncos? Chargers? Cowboys? Giants? Jets? Etc? Excellent point Om, thats exactly why I dont think there is a better back up Qb for this team then Brunell. We are finaly going into a season with the offense Gibbs wanted and built, already having that year in to learn this system and each other. I really feel we will see the results of a hall of fame coach this season and if so I cant wait to hear what kind of excuses the media will come up with about Gibbs proving he's still a great coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyber Pimp Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 The amount of passes per game were actually about the same for Brunell and Campbell. The amount of rushes per game wasnt the same. When the team ran more it opened the doors to be able to pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fwo40 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 The amount of rushes per game wasnt the same. When the team ran more it opened the doors to be able to pass. Counting only RB carries The average for 9 games under Brunell is 25.4 carries a game. The average for 7 games under Campbell is 28.57... Average difference of 4 carries per game. Brunell had the two highest individual games with 37 and 38 And Campbell had the lowest single game total with 14 If you want to get back to my point about how they were able to run in games that they had a lead, where Brunell wasn't killing them we can....if not whatever. Consistency in the effectiveness of the running game came during Campbell's time under center....but with a few exceptions under Brunell the offense was still trying to move the ball on the ground, but could not. There are certainly several factors for the success of the running game during Campbell's time...more cohension from the OL....etc...but certainly one of the factors was having a QB that was executing his part of the game plan better than Brunell. Sure the running game helps QB's.....but clearly vice versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC girl Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 I think this is the point that people are missing when they try and use Betts' success in the ground game late in the season as a reason why Jason looked better out there than Mark did. Only certain people, most of us get that. No running game when everyone is up at the line because you have absolutely no threat of passing deep. Not a hard thing to figure out really. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiefPowhatan17 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Brunell is still going to be here and if JC goes down which is speculation about "what if's", Brunell will go in and you will have a hard time getting him out of the line up. Gibbs loves him and when he is healthy he is good. The problem comes from when he is hurt. He doesn't tell anyone, and then the team goes down in flames. He needs to tell the team that he is not 100%, but he chooses not to and then sucks.:logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Glad to see I am not the only one who seen this. JC would have been pathetic had he had the pressure MB had in his face (we all know MB struggled as well). Teams knew our running game was not where it needed to be. The games where MB looked good (and JC looked good) was when the running game was working.IF JC gets hurt, we are fine, we do have a good backup who, with a running game is still a dangerous quarterback. Get rid of the running game, we suck again. Won't matter though, if our defense doesn't improve, we will suck again anyway. MB had people in his face because of 3 factors: 1. They had 8 in the box to stop the run and force him to throw 2. They didn't resepect his arm to throw the ball downfield 3. They didn't respect his legs to run. JC was more effective because of 3 factors: 1. They couldn't put 8 in the box because he would throw deep 2. They had to respect his arm downfield 3. They had to repect his ability to run with it. See, that is why MB struggled and JC didn't. The running game or o-line had nothing to do with it. MB had Portis. JC didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 The more I read these posts. The more I see a lot of people on here never played any football. Why would you stack 8 or 9 people in the box against SM, BL and ARE. Teams used the cover two to take away our passing game. CP missed the first two games and was never 100%. We ended up passing the ball a lot more then running the first half of the season. There was no need to stack the box because we were barly running the f***ing ball. What games were you guys watching? You guys watch games and are fans but some of you really dont know about the game of football. Ask anyone how to beat a cover two. You have to RUN the ball and make short passes. Defenses were able to use the cover two effectivly because of the lack of a running attack. Let that be your first lesson in football 101. And Brunell said himself, he struggles against cover 2 defenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 All we have to do is ask Indianapolis what to do. I am sure they have all their bases covered if Peyton Manning does down, so all we have to do is just check with them and find out what to do. P. Manning threw 21 TD's and 28 INT's his first year starting. We need to give JC a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 So you are willing to give JC 2-3 years to develop. But calling for MB head after a few bad games. Were the Defense played poorly, the oline played poorly and there was no presence of a run attack. I'd rather give a 25 yr old 2-3 years to develope than watch a 37 yr old with creaky legs and noodle arm continue to stuggle to throw it past the Line of scrimmage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinSince87 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 just pop me in im ready Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
professor21 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 randle el to qb:point2sky haha i was thinking the same thing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.