Are we overrating Todd Collins's performance?

[fnkdctr(007)]

I came here to say underrated not overrated.

I read the posts.

I thought about pass defense ratings.

HMMMMMMMM

Ok maybe overrated but still a 94.4 QB rating I don't know if Jason would've done that

However, Jason is the future and has more long term upside.

The tod is old. Sorry Tod but u r the man

[Califan007 The Constipated]

TC comes in and we go 4-0 against 2 division teams, the defending SB champs, the NFC team with the longest active win streak at the time and the eventual SB champs.

TC did NOT play against the "defending SB champs"...what are you smoking?

He did play against the defending NFC champs, the 5-6 Bears who happened to suck huge last year.

None of JC's wins last year came against teams that finished above .500. He is marginal against average teams and sucks against decent ones.

Well, let's see:

Against winning teams:

Jason Campbell: 149/265 (56.2%)

Todd Collins: 59/106 (55.6%)

Jason Campbell: 6.18 ypa

Todd Collins: 6.37 ypa

Jason Campbell: 8 TDs (3.01 TD%)

Todd Collins: 3 TDs (2.83 TD%)

Jason Campbell: 7 INTs (2.64 INT%)

Todd Collins: 2 INTs (1.88 INT%)

Jason Campbell: 73.76 QB rating

Todd Collins: 76.61 QB rating

None of this shows Collins as having played significantly any better than Campbell did...yet the team went 2-1 against winning teams with Collins last year while only going 0-5 against winning teams with Campbell last year.

It could be that it was the "type" of completions Collins made, perhaps more TDs thrown...no, that can't be it because Campbell had a higher TD% against winning teams than Collins did. So maybe it was something like more 1st down throws by Collins against winning teams than Campbell.

Against winning teams:

Jason Campbell: 33.2% of passes for 1st downs

Todd Collins: 35.8% of passes for 1st downs

I dunno...is that 2% enough to go from 0-5 against winning teams, to 2-1? And wouldn't that 2% difference be offset a bit by JC having a higher TD percentage against winning teams? For that matter, would JC having a QB rating that's only 3 ratings points higher mean he'd start winning more games against winning teams? Is that how close he is?

The only stat that points to Collins playing noticeably better than Campbell is in the INT percentage. That's not too surprising coming from a young QB with limited starts as compared to someone who's been in the league for 12 years. But it definitely points to an area that JC needs to improve on against winning teams. And maybe that INT % alone is enough to go from 0-5 to 2-1...but I somehow doubt it.

There was another stat that should maybe be looked at:

Against winning teams:

Lost fumbles by the rest of the team with JC as QB: 5

Lost fumbles by the rest of the team with TC as QB: 1

That's a lot of fumbling by teammates for any QB to have to overcome. And the thing is, Campbell has lost 7 fumbles in 7 games against winning teams, as where Collins has lost 2 fumbles in 3 games against winning teams. Extrapolated over 7 games, Collins would have lost 5 fumbles in 7 games against winning teams, a difference of only two fumbles between him and JC. So it really does point more towards how the rest of the team did in terms of turning the ball over. And I can't EVEN imagine how anyone would hold the QB responsible for fumbles made by his teammates.

Multiple picks, including a 1st, and now entering his 4th year he has led the skins to a single W against a team that finished above .500 and a single win against the division. Without JC starting, the skins have been a playoff team, with him, they haven't been. The Skins made the playoffs the 2 out of the 3 years he didn't finish as starter. There is no spinning or excuse for those facts. He has been a major bust up to his point. TC proved that JC was the weak link.

Talk about spinning lol...I'm getting vertigo just from trying to follow your chain of logic here.

Since the ONLY season Jason Campbell finished as starter, they were 3-6 when he took over, he would have had to been a near-perfect 6-1 in order for him to drive the Skins into the playoffs. Blaming JC for the Skins NOT making the playoffs that year is beyond asinine...but somehow you think it makes for a valid argument lol. But I'm sure that if we had put Todd Collins in instead of JC at the end of 2006 HE would have gone 7-0 and revived the franchise, because he would have been leading a far more efficient and productive offense.

Then again:

JC's last 4 starts of 2006: 23.5 points per game

Collins' last 4 starts of 2007: 23.75 points per game

I can see the obvious difference there, definitely. :cool:

Jason Campbell played a LOT better than some on here want to believe, and Collins played a LOT better than many on here thought he ever could. Thank God the coaches on the Redskins actually dissect game film and go over it with a fine tooth comb, so they see ALL of the realities that lead to the win/loss records...and leave the overly simplistic analysis to the fans.

[Thinking Skins]

Califan007, that was a nice post. How do you get the int % and TD %, etc? Is it just the number of TDs over number of attempts *100 or something like that?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Califan007, that was a nice post. How do you get the int % and TD %, etc? Is it just the number of TDs over number of attempts *100 or something like that?

Actually I just used a QB Ratings calculator lol...type that into Google and you'll get a lot of links. You just need attempts, completions, yards, TDs, and INTs. Or yeah, you could just divide the number of attempts by the number of TDs thrown...

[Wyvern]

...And so, Dr. Thinking Skins has conclusively proven that going 1-4 equals going 4-1. (...And perhaps with a little more time, he may be able to prove that going 1-4 was actually better than 4-1!)

Look if you want to use game statistics to try to spin what happened, have at it. I'm sure there are some fans who will appreciate all the work that you did. However many of us watched these games; we know what we saw, and many appreciate the limitations of statistics in telling the entire story.

So if you choose to use these latest numbers to put a different slant from how Collins passing was more effective in making teams pay for overloading in the box to defend against Portis, it's your post. And if you want to figure the team's redzone success under Collins was a fluke, and feel that Campbell could have done it better, you're free to hold that assumption too.

However I'm still a little irked that you thought the only way you can build up Campbell was to tear down Collins' story-tale performance of getting us into the playoffs and reminding Redskins about how to get it done in the redzone. Maybe it was too much of a stretch to try to elevate Campbell's going 1-4 (when everyone was relying on him) to Collins having gone 4-1; so you opted instead to devalue Collins accomplishment.

Frankly, if Campbell is as good as you think he is, then you didn't need to stoop to that. If he's that good, the 2008 season will be Campbell's coronation season as the long-awaited franchise savior. ...And Collins' accomplishment of 2007 will quickly fade into history, and most likely Collins too. Now if Campbell doesn't do that well in 2008, I guess there's always the 2009 offseason for you to convince us that he did.

That's it. At this juncture, I'm certain there is nothing more I could write that would convince you of anything that might go against those preconceived assumptions you held when you started this exercise.

[Thinking Skins]

Wyvern, why does it need to be bringing somebody up or down. I'm just analyzing the stats to see what I can see from them. Its the offseason and I've got a lot of time on my hands.

These are the same arguments we were having in 2004 when Ramsey came in for Brunell and played so well. We were asking if it was a fluke and who was the better QB. I'm doing the same thing. Just because the fans chose to put Collins on a pedestal doesn't mean I have to respect that pedestal. I see him as just another QB who has his strengths and weaknesses. And since the site has been so quick to point out Campbell's weaknesses (and slow to point out those of Collins), I thought it would be a nice pre-training camp comparison.

Oh, and about the 'Dr' thing...not quite yet....still working on that.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

...And so, Dr. Thinking Skins has conclusively proven that going 1-4 equals going 4-1. (...And perhaps with a little more time, he may be able to prove that going 1-4 was actually better than 4-1!)

Look if you want to use game statistics to try to spin what happened, have at it. I'm sure there are some fans who will appreciate all the work that you did. However many of us watched these games; we know what we saw, and many appreciate the limitations of statistics in telling the entire story.

The LAST thing I would ever trust is what fans "saw" and their perceptions...and if someone showed me stats that contradicted what I felt I knew, I'd take a moment to re-assess my own perceptions because I'm ok with the fact that perceptions aren't always accurate, even mine lol.

But if it's easier to just ignore whatever individual stats are given that don't conform to your opinion, be my guest.

[IHOPSkins]

..... Collins was the back-up in that system for what 11-12 years? Of course he is going to come in and succeed, he has ran the offense forever. He is a vet, regardless of how many games he's played/started in his career.....

What complete BS

Collins...expected to win?....off the bench?

Collins won games because he LEAD the team

Hopefully TCs LEADERSHIP rubbed off on the 3 year rookie

[No Excuses]

I don't care. TC15 is a baller. Dude saved our season. I could care less if hes better or worse than Campbell. I just care about the W's. I have no personal allegiance to any of these guys.

[AAARedskin]

All that matters is this: does the team win or does the team lose when QB John Doe is behind center? Yup, you can throw away all of the other stats. Todd Collins' performance was like something out of a movie! Marvelous....absolutely marvelous. Had the O-line protected Collins the way Hasselback was protected, the Skins could have won that game against Seattle.

[AAARedskin]

The LAST thing I would ever trust is what fans "saw" and their perceptions...and if someone showed me stats that contradicted what I felt I knew, I'd take a moment to re-assess my own perceptions because I'm ok with the fact that perceptions aren't always accurate, even mine lol.

But if it's easier to just ignore whatever individual stats are given that don't conform to your opinion, be my guest.

Wanna know how to measure a QB? How about we cut right to the chase, ok? It all comes down to wins vs. losses, baby.....and all the spinning of all the other stats don't mean a thing! The sooner some of you realize this the better. Who gives a rat's ass if a QB throws 3 TDs in a game but doesn't have the ability to lead the team down the field with under 2 minutes to play for the winning score? Campbell HAS NEVER led the Skins to a come from behind victory in the 4th quarter, and until he does (Tampa, Philly, Giants, and Dallas games, and he had plenty of chances) all of the B.S. spinning of his stats are getting on many fans' nerves big-time.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Wanna know how to measure a QB? How about we cut right to the chase, ok? It all comes down to wins vs. losses, baby.....and all the spinning of all the other stats don't mean a thing!

Then all the time coaches spend going over game tape of their QBs is a waste of time, I take it. They should just look at the win/loss column, and that'll tell them everything you need to know. You should really let the NFL know about this, would save the coaches and FO personnel a lot of wasted time.

I wonder how many people taking this viewpoint were cheering on Brunell's 2005 season?...Or where they saying that Brunell "had almost nothing to do with those wins, that was all Portis and the defense!"....because I sure remember a ****load of ESers using THAT argument against him. If I had the time, I'd go back and check lol...

The sooner some of you realize this the better. Who gives a rat's ass if a QB throws 3 TDs in a game but doesn't have the ability to lead the team down the field with under 2 minutes to play for the winning score? Campbell HAS NEVER led the Skins to a come from behind victory in the 4th quarter

Neither has Collins. JC has, though, driven his team back inside the opponent's red zone when behind with less than two minutes to play. So far Collins hasn't done that, either, at least not as a Redskin. I guess both are hopeless.

and until he does (Tampa, Philly, Giants, and Dallas games, and he had plenty of chances) all of the B.S. spinning of his stats are getting on many fans' nerves big-time.

We're trying to see if JC performed better than those of you with a thimble's worth of depth to your arguments want to believe. A helluva lot of things point to "Yes". Nobody gives a rat's ass if you don't think those things matter. They do.

[AAARedskin]

Only a fool would equate a 1-4 win/loss record with a 4-1 win/loss record for a starting QB. Goodbye.....oh, and enjoy your stay in Fantasyland. Sure, everybody is entitled to their opinion, but at some point you just gotta say enough is enough. Good luck....you are gonna need a lot of it.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

By the way, AAA, how did you go from saying this a month ago:

Campbell should have a fine season IF the O-line can do THEIR jobs, and protect him. He'll be playing in a far less predictable offense, and because it's an offense he has played in before, (at Auburn University) he'll do just fine.

...to saying this just now:

Wanna know how to measure a QB? How about we cut right to the chase, ok? It all comes down to wins vs. losses, baby.....and all the spinning of all the other stats don't mean a thing!...Who gives a rat's ass if a QB throws 3 TDs in a game but doesn't have the ability to lead the team down the field with under 2 minutes to play for the winning score? Campbell HAS NEVER led the Skins to a come from behind victory in the 4th quarter, and until he does (Tampa, Philly, Giants, and Dallas games, and he had plenty of chances) all of the B.S. spinning of his stats are getting on many fans' nerves big-time.

Because I'm trying to figure out exactly WHAT you based your first opinion of JC on to make you think he'll "do just fine" as long as the "O-line can do their job"?...Since you said the only thing that matters is "wins vs. losses, baby", and that the other stats "don't mean a thing", what could have possibly lead you to have the opinion a mere 4 weeks ago that Campbell will do "just fine"?...Seriously, what were you basing it on if not wins vs. losses??...

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Only a fool would equate a 1-4 win/loss record with a 4-1 win/loss record for a starting QB. Goodbye.....oh, and enjoy your stay in Fantasyland. Sure, everybody is entitled to their opinion, but at some point you just gotta say enough is enough. Good luck....you are gonna need a lot of it.

Well, you'll have to point out all the posts on this thread that said a 1-4 record is on par with a 4-1 record, because I don't remember seeing anyone say that. I've seen several such as yourself PRETEND like that's what people are saying, but I've yet to see anyone actually say it. I've read where people have disagreed with your viewpoint (as expressed by others) that a win/loss record alone tells the entire story of how a young QB is doing...but that's not what you're arguing here.

I mean, if you're having an argument with your imaginary ES friend, then I apologize for interrupting. But if you're having an argument with an actual live person on this thread, point out which poster said that a 1-4 record is the equal to a 4-1 record so that the rest of us will stop thinking you're referring to us. Thanks ahead of time... :thumbsup:

[chipwhich]

All that matters is this: does the team win or does the team lose when QB John Doe is behind center? Yup, you can throw away all of the other stats. Todd Collins' performance was like something out of a movie! Marvelous....absolutely marvelous. Had the O-line protected Collins the way Hasselback was protected, the Skins could have won that game against Seattle.

LOL to be so simplistic....

Lots of people would say Eli Manning would never win the superbowl....ahhh to be so simplistic...

But when you include a TEAM behind him, it makes a difference.

Now I am not saying you dont need a good QB to win the superbowl. But to absolutely ignore TEAM play is just SILLY.

Joe Gibbs II offense was an absolute JOKE. Add to that injuries to the O-Line, and receivers and, play callng what we have is totally UNKNOWN. Collins got the benefit of O-Line play, receiving, and play calling. Lets leave it at that and move on.

[skinsince72]

I don't think so. His performance spoke for itself. And it got us into the playoffs. Probably the best backup in the league right now.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

LOL to be so simplistic....

Lots of people would say Eli Manning would never win the superbowl....ahhh to be so simplistic...

Funny you should say that lol...

I was wrong about Eli Manning. When he was drafted, I thought he was incredibly average, and that he could never, ever play in a Super Bowl....

Joe Gibbs II offense was an absolute JOKE. Add to that injuries to the O-Line, and receivers and, play callng what we have is totally UNKNOWN. Collins got the benefit of O-Line play, receiving, and play calling. Lets leave it at that and move on.

It's funny you should say THAT lol...

YES, I think the Redskins have a coaching issue right now....and I also think that they are holding Jason Campbell back with the predictable short passing game.

In reality, it seems AAARedskin agrees with you, though you'd never know it by this thread.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

I don't think so. His performance spoke for itself. And it got us into the playoffs. Probably the best backup in the league right now.

For the record, I don't think he's overrated, either, at least not in general. He's got great presence and good field awareness. There are some who think he should be the starter, and perhaps THEY may have him overrated...not because TC couldn't start and do decently, but because he could easily go 8-8 and have a few too many games like the one against Seattle...and I don't see him improving at this point in his career, so what we have is what we'll get from season to season.

[chipwhich]

In reality, it seems AAARedskin agrees with you, though you'd never know it by this thread.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[Wyvern]

Look if you want to use game statistics to try to spin what happened, have at it. I'm sure there are some fans who will appreciate all the work that you did. However many of us watched these games; we know what we saw, and many appreciate the limitations of statistics in telling the entire story

The LAST thing I would ever trust is what fans "saw" and their perceptions...and if someone showed me stats that contradicted what I felt I knew, I'd take a moment to re-assess my own perceptions because I'm ok with the fact that perceptions aren't always accurate, even mine lol.

But if it's easier to just ignore whatever individual stats are given that don't conform to your opinion, be my guest.

Califan --when you quote me, do me the favor of trying not to distort what I was trying to say in my quote. Understanding there are limitations tp statistics telling the whole story of what happened on a play (or series of plays) is not the same taking a stance of simply ignoring all statistics. Now, I haven't called you a "data-drone" because you seem to like burrowing into stats. I understand how your comments have indicated a better appreciation of game than that. I'd hope you'd extend the same courtesy.

But I challenge you to rely on statistics to fill out everything that happened on the following plays:

Buc's game:

2-10-WAS-20 (14:53) 17-J.Campbell pass incomplete short left to 26-C.Portis.

Whose fault was this? If you check the game, Campbell couldn't hit his short pass to the RB most of the game. Was it Portis?

Better example: (Bill's game)

1-10-WAS 35 (4:12) 17-J.Campbell pass short left to 26-C.Portis to WAS 37 for 2 yards (56-K.Ellison).

Was this a checkdown? If so, was someone else open? Did Portis have trouble fielding Campbell's pass before the linebacker closed? Did Portis go down too easily, or did Campbell telegraph the pass?

Another example: Dallas game

3-10-DAL 19 (1:50) (Shotgun) 17-J.Campbell pass short right intended for 82-A.Randle El INTERCEPTED by 41-T.Newman at DAL 12.

This is an interception. Collins was intercepted passing to Moss. Were they the same kind of interceptions. Or did Campbell simply throw badly this time? I think you can remember the play, right? Perception?

Stats are nice, but they don't tell the whole picture. Still, it's pleasant to finish on a high note, so I offer this one:

Scoreless Bears Game, 24 seconds to the half:

1-10-CHI 21 (:24) 15-T.Collins pass deep right to 87-T.Yoder for 21 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

This play was like a rain-cloud breaking a long drought. I didn't remember it was for 21 yards, rather I only remembered how long it had been since the Skins had got the job done in the last seconds of play. It was energizing! No special stat for that play, beside 21 yards, 1 completion, and a TD.

Have a nice Sunday.

[Voice_of_Reason]

Wow. I just want to toss out a "atta boy" to Califan007 and Thinking Skins for the amazing amount of statistics that they provided. That's a ton of research.

Of course, here, statistics and proof tend to go the way of the dinosaur, it's much better to argue about perception.

What I said earlier still holds true: I think TC did a very good job when he came in, better than expected, and played well enough to win 4 games, and played pretty badly in the Seattle game. Objectively, I also think that some of the hype was just hype, the team was playing better in general, and was more healthy in general.

I'm hoping that next year JC is able to take the next step and become the QB that we all want him to be. Unless you just don't want him to succeed to prove a point (I think there are some media members in this category, and maybe even some on this board).

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Califan --when you quote me, do me the favor of trying not to distort what I was trying to say in my quote. Understanding there are limitations tp statistics telling the whole story of what happened on a play (or series of plays) is not the same taking a stance of simply ignoring all statistics. Now, I haven't called you a "data-drone" because you seem to like burrowing into stats. I understand how your comments have indicated a better appreciation of game than that. I'd hope you'd extend the same courtesy.

What you say and what you DO are two different things...

Labeling stats as "spin" hardly qualifies as "understanding there are limitations to statistics" lol :laugh:...it's being dismissive of them outright.

But I challenge you to rely on statistics to fill out everything that happened on the following plays:

Buc's game: Whose fault was this? If you check the game, Campbell couldn't hit his short pass to the RB most of the game. Was it Portis?

Better example: (Bill's game) Was this a checkdown? If so, was someone else open? Did Portis have trouble fielding Campbell's pass before the linebacker closed? Did Portis go down too easily, or did Campbell telegraph the pass?

Another example: Dallas game This is an interception. Collins was intercepted passing to Moss. Were they the same kind of interceptions. Or did Campbell simply throw badly this time? I think you can remember the play, right? Perception?

Stats are nice, but they don't tell the whole picture. Still, it's pleasant to finish on a high note, so I offer this one:

Scoreless Bears Game, 24 seconds to the half: This play was like a rain-cloud breaking a long drought. I didn't remember it was for 21 yards, rather I only remembered how long it had been since the Skins had got the job done in the last seconds of play. It was energizing! No special stat for that play, beside 21 yards, 1 completion, and a TD.

Have a nice Sunday.

:laugh:...You are NOT actually taking FOUR STINKIN' PLAYS to illustrate that perception is just as accurate as a studied analysis and breakdown of an entire game and season, are you? :doh:

Let me answer you by bringing up my OWN arbitrary four points:

1) I had a debate with someone about 2-3 years ago where they said Ramsey was awful on his short throws in 2004 and needed to be benched partially for that very reason (he was upset at him being named starter). "Really", I said..."Because according to the season-long breakdown of his stats by KC Joyner (I think), Ramsey was something like the third MOST ACCURATE quarterback in terms of short passes."

Now, which was more accurate, the statistical breakdown of Ramsey's performance in the short passing game, or this fan's perception of "what we all saw" with the stats being just "spin"?

2) Another ESer said that what we'll continue to see from Jason Campbell this upcoming season was more inability to read defenses leading to us continuing to see lots of INTs and low completion percentages. So I showed the statistical breakdown that showed JC had one of the best INT-per-attempt ratios of any starting QB in the league, and showed that his completion percentage rose 7 percent from 2006 to 2007...

I then said that if he's right and JC's "horrible play" continued at its present rate, then that means we're due to see JC's INT-per-attempt ratio to be possibly the best in the league, and his completion percentage will be around 65%.

So which was more accurate: the statistical breakdown of JC's performance in terms of INTs and accuracy, or this fan's perception of "what we all saw" and the statistic were "just spin"?

3) In the 2007 draft we skipped completely drafting any D-Linemen, and half of ES went absolutely nuts because of it. Too many fans to mention claimed that the Skins' DLine was the "worst in the NFL" and ridiculed Gibbs and Williams for "not seeing what we all could see". Gibbs and Williams, however, said they went through and broke down game film from the entire season, and determined that out of all the defensive units, the DLine performed the best. They said the linebackers and defensive backs underperformed. Bull****, claimed the fans whose perceptions were supposed to be far more reliable than actually breaking down film and analyzing statistics.

We all know how the 2007 season turned out...and we had our first double-digit sack D-lineman in god knows how long. And Landry turned out to be an enormous addition to the defense.

So which was more accurate: Gibbs, Williams and their analysis of the stats and breakdown of the play-by-play of the game film, or fans' perceptions of "what we all know we saw" and the statistics were "just spin"?

4) Here's one just for you, cuz I'm a nice guy, too lol...In the 2006 preseason, everyone and their mothers were saying Todd Collins was so horrible he needed not just to be relegated to 3rd string, but cut altogether. Too old, too innacurate, no poise in the pocket...we heard it all. Some of us said if you watched the OLine, you'd see that they were not giving him the time needed to even slightly be effective. I think someone even broke down the O-linemen's gaffes and screw ups while Collins was in there, and showed the drop off between the Oline he played behind and the Oline Brunell played behind. Nonsense, most said, we could "all see" that Collins is a waste of roster space and doesn't deserve to be called a professional QB.

So who ended up being more accurate: those who bothered to look beyond the surface and analyze the play of other units on offense and speculate how they might have effected Collins' play...or fans' perceptions of "what we all know we saw" and the statistics were just "spin"?

I'd offer you the advice of trying not to be arrogant enough to think that your perception alone trumps every other statistic and analytical breakdown that can be shown to counter your viewpoint. Respond to the stats, show--not just say they aren't, SHOW how they're either not telling the whole story or provide the missing context of the stats...do something other than repeat the mantra of "Stats can be spun" and "we all know what we saw"...oh, and the doozy of the bunch, "All that matters is wins and losses!".

That's what a lot of us are doing. Try and join us.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Wow. I just want to toss out a "atta boy" to Califan007 and Thinking Skins for the amazing amount of statistics that they provided. That's a ton of research.

Of course, here, statistics and proof tend to go the way of the dinosaur, it's much better to argue about perception.

Exactly...because you're perceptions can never be wrong, and never need to be backed up. The fact that you hold them validates them as accurate.

[eagleskins]

What truly is funny is how the JC nuthuggers expect people to believe that the team suddenly got healthy and started to compete better at halftime of the Bears game. JC is a bum, hopefully we are able to overcome it with others on offense and defense.