flexxskins Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 28. Redskins (2006 Rank: 13) Jason Campbell fared well in seven late-season starts last year. He didn't make the highlight reel very often, but he avoided sacks (just seven) and fumbles (one) and proved that he was a decent decision maker. Campbell must improve his accuracy and show that he can handle the entire playbook. Backup Mark Brunell is on his last legs. His arm is spent and he bails on too many plays. Todd Collins is a well-traveled third stringer. Rookie Jordan Palmer is Carson Palmer's brother, but most of their similarities are buried in the DNA sequence. http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/7024980 I usually don't really even pay attention much to rankings. But I couldn't help but notice that the last couple that I have seen for QB's, just seem to keep getting worse. BTW, I did a search and didn't see this posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatSkins27 Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 you cant give this any stock...they put cardinals with matt L at 13 tenn 14 and then the chiefs 15....brodie croile ????is the 15 th besty in a 32 team league?? The article is just rediculous! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNoles21 Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 its all good...next year Jason Campbell will have had a season to wow everyone and we will be top ten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePreciating Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 Kitna and Croyle over: Jay Cutler Byron Leftwich Alex Smith Jeff Garcia Michael Vick The author is Mike Tanier of FootballOutsiders.com. He should be fired today. My 12-year-old cousin knows more about football. This jerk Tanier just ranked through 14 and then stopped ranking. ANYONE can comment on the playoff teams, you JERK. I hate this guy so much. I've never read an article by him until now, but ignorance on that level (while being PAID for it) is just infuriating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD5 Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 This isn't so bad.....they are giving JC props, and rightly so. They dropped our overall score partly because of Brunell...and rightly so. Still.....20 sounds a little more accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flexxskins Posted July 16, 2007 Author Share Posted July 16, 2007 This isn't so bad.....they are giving JC props, and rightly so. They dropped our overall score partly because of Brunell...and rightly so. Still.....20 sounds a little more accurate. I was thinking the same thing. I was thinking that his props didn't justify his rating. Which BTW was even lower than Peter Kings last month at 26. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InsaneBoost Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 Fox is almost as bad as ESPN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdlives Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 Until he proves something Campbell shouldn't be rated highly. Of course that goes for any QB who hasn't played an entire season. Too many have gone before, played well or even outstanding in limited action, and proven to be average at best when given the reigns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
live4burgandyandgold Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 The texans, browns, raiders, and vikings are the only teams that are apparently worse then us. Looking at that makes me livid! By the way...how the %* do you rank rex grossman above campbell. I dont care what anyone says rex is absolutely horrible. even based off intangibles like poise, confidence, and consistancey you'd have to put campbell higher. What a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flexxskins Posted July 16, 2007 Author Share Posted July 16, 2007 Until he proves something Campbell shouldn't be rated highly. Of course that goes for any QB who hasn't played an entire season. Too many have gone before, played well or even outstanding in limited action, and proven to be average at best when given the reigns.Which makes me wonder why he would rank Cutler and the Broncos so much higher than Campbell. He played in even fewer games than JC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
live4burgandyandgold Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 Until he proves something Campbell shouldn't be rated highly. Of course that goes for any QB who hasn't played an entire season. Too many have gone before, played well or even outstanding in limited action, and proven to be average at best when given the reigns. Thats absoluetly right, i dont think anyone is saying he should be number one, the thing is that campbell has proved enough to deserve a ranking higher than 28! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrieg07 Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 These lists are created for controversey. Detroit, Miami, Tampa, Buffalo & K.C. all belong below Washington. Kitna is not only on drugs, but he sucks, Green & Beck, good luck! Losman? Well Garcia may be good, but who will start in Tampa, there is too much age & injury in FLA for Mia & T.B. to be ranked above the skins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrieg07 Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 At least they have the bottom 4 right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD5 Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 These lists are created for controversey. Detroit, Miami, Tampa, Buffalo & K.C. all belong below Washington. Kitna is not only on drugs, but he sucks, Green & Beck, good luck! Losman? Well Garcia may be good, but who will start in Tampa, there is too much age & injury in FLA for Mia & T.B. to be ranked above the skins. Your point about controversy is valid. But arguing that JC is better, or will play better than Garcia last season is optimistic--to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan31 Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 these ranking don't mean S!!! Cambell will have a solid year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Touchdown Redskins Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 I do not think these rankings are created solely for controversy, and even if they were, there would be no national controversy about the Skins being ranked 28th, maybe just an ES controversy. In any case, I think our ranking is way below what it should be. After all, JC is the owner of the second longest consecutive games touchdown streak in the league! Also, if you looked at Carson Palmer's development, JC is ahead of that. Both sat out and learned in their first years behind capable veteran quarterbacks (Brunell for JC and Kitna for Palmer). In Palmer's second year he had just as many TDs as INTs, whereas JC had a +4 ratio and might have done even better had he played the whole year. The next season, Palmer blew up and became a pro bowl quarterback. No reason to think JC won't do the same with our talented O-line. Also, we have a great backup QB in Brunell who knows the system and has taken a very similar team to the playoffs two years ago. This alone should bump us at least 13 spots to #15 on the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 if demonstrating on the field success first should be a factor in consideration of the rankings than how does Matt Leinart end up as a top 10-15 quarterback? this is a sexy pick because he has two good wide receivers not because he showed anything last year that others didn't. one guy that I think is headed for a fall is 37 year old Jeff Garcia. He pulled a 10-6 rabbit out of his old hat last year with the Eagles but looked like putz the previous 3-4 years. my guess here is that he 'reverts to the mean' and plays his age in 2007, which means that Chris Simms is going to get on the field to show us if he can come back from that lacerated spleen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sellyoursol Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 Whomever wrote this article is a complete stooge. Ranking Schaub as the third worst starter in the NFL is lunacy. I'd love to have him in the Burgandy and Gold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt'n Obvious Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 I honestly prefer everyone to have Campbell ranked low. It can only make them look dumber for having him so low in the first place. Campbell is under the radar right now, but thats makes him even more dangerous. :logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.