Portis, Moss, Campbell, Cooley--A Look Back

[Oldfan]

We seriously overpaid for Clinton Portis. He's a good player, but not worth what we gave up.

We gave up too much for Campbell. Three picks for a QB with sloppy mechanics who would never have made it in the offense he was selected to run was too much. Zorn's influence on Jason's career does not retroactively make his draft selection a good one.

Santana and Coles is a wash. Santana is hell on wheels when he's healthy, but he can't stay healthy. Both teams got what they expected in that trade.

Chris Cooley could have been drafted with the #3 we gave up for Brunell who was no more useful to us than Patrick Ramsey. If Gibbs had kept our draft picks in 2004-2006, we would likely have had a few more studs like Cooley to brag about.

The initial Gibbs personnel plan was abandoned after the dismal 2006 season. Let's not try to use the team's recent success which is due to a combination of factors to cleanse the past of mistakes.

[Aston]

We seriously overpaid for Clinton Portis. He's a good player, but not worth what we gave up.

We gave up too much for Campbell. Three picks for a QB with sloppy mechanics who would never have made it in the offense he was selected to run was too much. Zorn's influence on Jason's career does not retroactively make his draft selection a good one.

Santana and Coles is a wash. Santana is hell on wheels when he's healthy, but he can't stay healthy. Both teams got what they expected in that trade.

Chris Cooley could have been drafted with the #3 we gave up for Brunell who was no more useful to us than Patrick Ramsey. If Gibbs had kept our draft picks in 2004-2006, we would likely have had a few more studs like Cooley to brag about.

The initial Gibbs personnel plan was abandoned after the dismal 2006 season. Let's not try to use the team's recent success which is due to a combination of factors to cleanse past mistakes.

This sounds like the same bitter tone as that guy who insisted that Sean Taylor was overrated.

[Voice_of_Reason]

Sorry but we have a very deep team by today's standards and that is all on Joe Gibbs' plate. He left us in good shape and that includes the full slate of draft picks that were used this year. The injuries that we have had would have crippled many clubs. Instead, when Marcus Washington goes down we bring in Blades (Gibbs addition). When Jansen and/or Samuels goes down we bring in Heyer (Gibbs addition). When Jason Taylor goes down Demetric Evans or Chris Wilson come in (Gibbs additions). When Shawn Springs goes down Fred Smoot or Leigh Torrence come in (Gibbs additions). When Jason Campbell went down last year Todd Collins came in (Gibbs addition). When Cornelius Griffin goes down Lorenzo Alexander or Anthony Montgomery come in (Gibbs additions). I'm sure I'm missing an injury or two but we've had a ton of injuries this year but it's hardly caused a ripple.

Nah, but you're adding logic and reason into an argument based on rabble rousing and hating.

There are some who will never give Gibbs any credit whatsoever for anything and will take any opportunity to spew hatred his way.

These people generally read JLC and listen to Steve Czaban and Brian Mitchell and believe every word of what they say as the sacred gospel, without any self examination of the facts by watching the game critically on their own.

Yours is a useless argument to them. People are going to say what they're gonig to say. Folks have already made up their mind. It's as simple as that.

For my money, Gibbs did some amazing things for the team in resurrecting a proud franchise that was completely adrift after the Spurrier years. He made some on field mistakes, but it's unmistakable that he did make some contributions as well.

[Oldfan]

This sounds like the same bitter tone as that guy who insisted that Sean Taylor was overrated.

And, given the tragic circumstances that you have going for you, you sound like a cheap shot artist.

[skinfan2k]

Honestly, I really dont care how much I have to give if I know a franchise QB is the result of the trade

[Voice_of_Reason]

We seriously overpaid for Clinton Portis. He's a good player, but not worth what we gave up.

We gave up too much for Campbell. Three picks for a QB with sloppy mechanics who would never have made it in the offense he was selected to run was too much. Zorn's influence on Jason's career does not retroactively make his draft selection a good one.

Santana and Coles is a wash. Santana is hell on wheels when he's healthy, but he can't stay healthy. Both teams got what they expected in that trade.

Chris Cooley could have been drafted with the #3 we gave up for Brunell who was no more useful to us than Patrick Ramsey. If Gibbs had kept our draft picks in 2004-2006, we would likely have had a few more studs like Cooley to brag about.

The initial Gibbs personnel plan was abandoned after the dismal 2006 season. Let's not try to use the team's recent success which is due to a combination of factors to cleanse the past of mistakes.

Portis: What we gave up was a 2nd. Baily was gone either through trade or he was going to be released. So he was gone no matter what. So Portis went for a second.

Campbell: Gave up 2 draft picks, actually, if you think about it. They traded a 1, 3 and 4, but got a 1 back and used it on a QB. Peyton had "happy feet" coming out of college. There were questions about Eli's mechanics. They had to change Philip River's mechanics as well. No QB coming out of the draft is going to have NFL mechanics. Colleges don't coach that and anybody who thinks they do doesn't watch college football. And Campbell through his first 16 starts was nowhere as bad as people want to make him. Peyton went something like 4-12 his first season. McNabb wasn't much better. QBs need a little time to mature. And I'll give you that Gibbs/Saunders were not the best teachers for Campbell, but that's not so much on Campbell as it is on Gibbs/Saunders/whoever the QB coach was.

I'm not going to defend Brunell, but I'll say this: Gibbs was smart enough to know what he had in Ramsey, and that wasn't much. They gave up a #3 for Brunell. He did lead them to the playoffs in 2005.

[Oldfan]

Honestly, I really dont care how much I have to give if I know a franchise QB is the result of the trade

Even stupid decisions sometimes work out in our favor. That doesn't make those decisions less stupid. It just makes us lucky.

What is a "franchise QB" by the way? Can you define that for us?

[Oldfan]

Portis: What we gave up was a 2nd. Baily was gone either through trade or he was going to be released. So he was gone no matter what. So Portis went for a second.

You are misinformed about this trade which has been discussed ad nauseum.

Campbell: Gave up 2 draft picks, actually, if you think about it. They traded a 1, 3 and 4, but got a 1 back and used it on a QB.

A #1, a #3 and a #4 was the cost... that's three picks.

Peyton had "happy feet" coming out of college.

Archie trained his boys to have "happy feet." They bounce like a tennis player waiting serve.

And Campbell through his first 16 starts was nowhere as bad as people want to make him.

Until this season his won-lost percentage was worse than Ramsey's despite being surrounded by better talent. Most fans, including me, thought he had to make significant improvement this year to make it... and he's done that.

I'm not going to defend Brunell, but I'll say this: Gibbs was smart enough to know what he had in Ramsey, and that wasn't much. They gave up a #3 for Brunell. He did lead them to the playoffs in 2005.

Brunell was a waste of a pick and a serious hit on our cap which probably cost us another player. As for 2005, our passing game fell to 150 yards per game average after Santana was double-teamed by opponents (after San Francisco).

Ramsey's Redskins W-L record was as good as Brunell's despite being surrounded by less talent. Brunell was a mistake.

[No_Pressure]

Parcells said that to Cooley? How apporpriate that he was selected by the Skins then.

Even more appropriate that we helped get ourselves into the playoffs and effectively knocked the Cowboys out of the playoffs in 2005 thanks to a 3 TD game from said career backup against Parcells' team.

[SonnyJ]

Portis: What we gave up was a 2nd. Baily was gone either through trade or he was going to be released. So he was gone no matter what. So Portis went for a second.

Campbell: Gave up 2 draft picks, actually, if you think about it. They traded a 1, 3 and 4, but got a 1 back and used it on a QB. Peyton had "happy feet" coming out of college. There were questions about Eli's mechanics. They had to change Philip River's mechanics as well. No QB coming out of the draft is going to have NFL mechanics. Colleges don't coach that and anybody who thinks they do doesn't watch college football. And Campbell through his first 16 starts was nowhere as bad as people want to make him. Peyton went something like 4-12 his first season. McNabb wasn't much better. QBs need a little time to mature. And I'll give you that Gibbs/Saunders were not the best teachers for Campbell, but that's not so much on Campbell as it is on Gibbs/Saunders/whoever the QB coach was.

I'm not going to defend Brunell, but I'll say this: Gibbs was smart enough to know what he had in Ramsey, and that wasn't much. They gave up a #3 for Brunell. He did lead them to the playoffs in 2005.

Wasting your breath on Oldfan, I'm afraid. He's the classic definition of a cynic - knows the price of everything, but the value of nothing.

It always cracks me up when people combine a complete lack of insider knowledge with a complete lack of relevant business experience and make statements of absolute certitude when, in reality, they're just pulling stuff out of the wazoo.

[DieselPwr44]

What is a "franchise QB" by the way? Can you define that for us?

If you are seriously asking that question, then I have to seriously doubt:

A: How much football you've actually watched and paid attention to over the decades

B: Doubt your FBI

Redskins fans, above all, should know exactly what a franchise QB is just for the mere fact that we haven't had one since 1984.

Maybe my definition doesn't match yours but when you have one guy at the QB position that performs above average for most of his career, that's a Franchise QB.

Example:

Joe Montana

Johnny Unitas

Steve Young

Tom Brady

Peyton Manning

Fans of those teams never once went into camp wondering who their starting QB was.

That's what a Franchise QB is all about Charlie Brown....

[Oldfan]

If you are seriously asking that question, then I have to seriously doubt:

A: How much football you've actually watched and paid attention to over the decades

B: Doubt your FBI

Redskins fans, above all, should know exactly what a franchise QB is just for the mere fact that we haven't had one since 1984.

Maybe my definition doesn't match yours but when you have one guy at the QB position that performs above average for most of his career, that's a Franchise QB.

Example:

Joe Montana

Johnny Unitas

Steve Young

Tom Brady

Peyton Manning

Fans of those teams never once went into camp wondering who their starting QB was.

That's what a Franchise QB is all about Charlie Brown....

Despite your condescension, you never managed to define the term "franchise QB."

All those QBs you listed are QBs who played on perennial winners. Am I supposed to assume that a franchise QB is determined by the fact that his team was a perennial winner?

If so, then no QB can become a franchise QB until after his team has achieved excellence. Is that how you define the term?

The poster I asked to define the term said:

Honestly, I really dont care how much I have to give if I know a franchise QB is the result of the trade

Obviously, he was using the term differently since there's no way to know whether a QB will become part of a perrennial winning team..

[skinzdar55]

Agreed that the Giants have perhaps the best depth in the NFL. That doesn't mean that ours is poor.

Let's take a look--as you say--within the division. Whenever Donovan McNabb or Brian Westbrook so much as chips a nail, everyone rushes to their defense with the 'injuries' excuse.

We're not afforded the same luxury, for whatever reason.

Putting last year aside for the moment, I saw a team this year march into Dallas, lose both Shawn Springs AND Fred Smoot in the second half of the game, and STILL refuse to allow Dallas to move the ball.

Hell, Springs--arguably our best defensive player--has been in and out of the lineup all year. I'm still waiting for someone to exploit that.

I've seen Marcus Washington shuffled in and out of the lineup, with HB Blades showing that he's a damn fine player.

I've seen LaRon Landry play next to a revolving cast of characters at safety. I've seen Cornelius Griffin and Jason Taylor unable to play.

I've seen our original starting RT (Heyer) get hurt, and Jansen has been plugged back in and has outperformed the original starter.

All with positive results.

Yet just wait for Donovan McNabb to get a bruise, and then wait for the excuses to flow.

I don't think you can overlook what this injury-riddled team did last year. Just look at last year's defense alone. If you think it was all Todd Collins who made the difference, then let's just look at the defense.

How do we lose Marcus Washington, Rocky McIntosh, Sean Taylor, and Carlos Rogers, and not miss a beat defensively? Because of Todd Collins?

We were the only team in football last year to lose as many players to season-ending injuries as we did and still make the playoffs. Sorry, but that counts for something in my book.

Agreed 100%!! :applause:

You are on point with EVERYTHING you said

[terpfan]

Great post. I really enjoyed reading that.

And as for the guy who mentioned continuity, a whole-heartedly agree. THAT might be the single most important factor to our current success. This team knows EACH OTHER. I think that may be even more important than knowing the system.

[Oldfan]

Wasting your breath on Oldfan, I'm afraid. He's the classic definition of a cynic - knows the price of everything, but the value of nothing.

It always cracks me up when people combine a complete lack of insider knowledge with a complete lack of relevant business experience and make statements of absolute certitude when, in reality, they're just pulling stuff out of the wazoo.

I must have really gotten under your skin, SJ.

Gosh, I'm sorry.

[Larry Brown #43]

We seriously overpaid for Clinton Portis. He's a good player, but not worth what we gave up.

We gave up too much for Campbell. Three picks for a QB with sloppy mechanics who would never have made it in the offense he was selected to run was too much. Zorn's influence on Jason's career does not retroactively make his draft selection a good one.

Santana and Coles is a wash. Santana is hell on wheels when he's healthy, but he can't stay healthy. Both teams got what they expected in that trade.

I wouldn't reverse any one of the three trades if I had the chance. If Portis stays healthy, he could flirt with a 2,000 yard season this year. He's what makes our offense go. Champ's a very good player, but pass defense has been a strength of this team even without him, and Portis is playing at an MVP level.

I'd take Moss over Coles 100 times out of a 100.

As for Campbell, sure, I give Zorn credit for what he's done with him. But you can't turn chicken **** into chicken salad. Zorn has worked with a lot of QBs over the years. My money says Campbell will go down as the best he's worked with to date.

[Shilsu]

Agreed that the Giants have perhaps the best depth in the NFL. That doesn't mean that ours is poor.

Okay. You originally said "NO TEAM" had depth. So now that we've agreed that was wrong...

Let's take a look--as you say--within the division. Whenever Donovan McNabb or Brian Westbrook so much as chips a nail, everyone rushes to their defense with the 'injuries' excuse.

We're not afforded the same luxury, for whatever reason.

We ARE afforded that same luxury. The quarterback and runningback positions are difficult to address in terms of backups because of two things:

1. Competent players at these positions are a rarity. QB especially.

2. They are expensive.

Those two conditions are not true to the same extent for pretty much every other single position.

Putting last year aside for the moment, I saw a team this year march into Dallas, lose both Shawn Springs AND Fred Smoot in the second half of the game, and STILL refuse to allow Dallas to move the ball.

Three TDs by three different players and over 350 yards and 24 points is not a great defensive showing.

Hell, Springs--arguably our best defensive player--has been in and out of the lineup all year. I'm still waiting for someone to exploit that.

You mean like in 2006?

I've seen Marcus Washington shuffled in and out of the lineup, with HB Blades showing that he's a damn fine player.

Yes, HB Blades is proof why depth is important.

I've seen LaRon Landry play next to a revolving cast of characters at safety. I've seen Cornelius Griffin and Jason Taylor unable to play.

I've seen our original starting RT (Heyer) get hurt, and Jansen has been plugged back in and has outperformed the original starter.

Right... Because Heyer was never that good in the first place.

All with positive results.

Yet just wait for Donovan McNabb to get a bruise, and then wait for the excuses to flow.

Yeah... Like how our lack of pass rush is due to JT's injury. Or how the reason our defense sucked in 2006 was because our second string safety, Pearson Prioleau got injured on the first play of the season.

I don't think you can overlook what this injury-riddled team did last year. Just look at last year's defense alone. If you think it was all Todd Collins who made the difference, then let's just look at the defense.

How do we lose Marcus Washington, Rocky McIntosh, Sean Taylor, and Carlos Rogers, and not miss a beat defensively? Because of Todd Collins?

We were the only team in football last year to lose as many players to season-ending injuries as we did and still make the playoffs. Sorry, but that counts for something in my book.

Yes, because of Todd Collins.

First of all, Marcus Washington, Rocky McIntosh, Sean Taylor, and Carlos Rogers were never all out at the same time.

Second of all, when Marcus Washington and Carlos Rogers WERE out at the same time, that set off a span where our record was 1-5.

Then we won 4 in a row. Yes, because of Todd Collins.

[Shilsu]

Nah, but you're adding logic and reason into an argument based on rabble rousing and hating.

Can we stop calling inane rationalization and excuse making "logic and reason"? It has become an annoying trend where somebody spits out propaganda and the next guy in what he thinks is a witty sarcastic remark exclaims, "How dare you insert logic in this discussion!"

And then when someone proves the original poster wrong, the cheerleader disappears. Examples...

1. Somebody puts out a "fact" that 5 of the Top 10 sackings teams failed to make the playoffs. Somebody talks about how great such research is. Then the truth is revealed that 5 of the Top 5 teams made the playoffs and there were actually TWELVE teams in the Top 10 due to a three way tie and SEVEN made the playoffs.

2. Somebody claims that we ARE getting pressure because there was one or two sacks in the game, or because the quarterback steps up to make his throw. Then of course someone parrots, "How dare you insert logic and reason!" Despite the fact that having one or two sacks in the game is a really crappy pace and a quarterback stepping up into the pocket is what he's supposed to do. Then Greg Blache addresses the same issue.

3. Somebody claims the reason we're not getting sacks is because Dallas and Philly have great big offensive lines. "Logic and reason!" Then we fail to get adequate pressure in our last three games.

Now let's examine what's so logical about his post.

When Jason Taylor goes down Demetric Evans or Chris Wilson come in (Gibbs additions).

So it's a great thing that Demetric Evans and Chris Wilson can come in when Jason Taylor goes down...

But it wasn't a great thing that Demetric Evans and Chris Wilson can come in when Phillip Daniels goes down?

JT > PD

DE + CW - JT = Good

DE + CW - PD = Needs JT

Yeah that's some great logic.

[Shilsu]

Gibbs was smart enough to know what he had in Ramsey, and that wasn't much.

Gibbs was smart enough to know what he had in Ramsey, but he refused to trade him when the Dolphins were offering a #1 draft pick or Ogunleye, a DE we sorely could've used. Okay.

[Oldfan]

I wouldn't reverse any one of the three trades if I had the chance. If Portis stays healthy, he could flirt with a 2,000 yard season this year. He's what makes our offense go. Champ's a very good player, but pass defense has been a strength of this team even without him, and Portis is playing at an MVP level.

I'd take Moss over Coles 100 times out of a 100.

As for Campbell, sure, I give Zorn credit for what he's done with him. But you can't turn chicken **** into chicken salad. Zorn has worked with a lot of QBs over the years. My money says Campbell will go down as the best he's worked with to date.

Jason is a good athlete, so Zorn had that to work with. But, he took a QB who seemed best suited for a deep-throwing vertical offense, the kind he was drafted to run, and made him tighter, quicker and more accurate. I doubt that's ever been done before.

As for the previous trades, I don't agree with you. After the 2006 season, Gibbs abandoned his plan to trade up in the draft, trade picks for vets, and invest heavily in free agency. He abandoned it because it wasn't paying off. Now, you are using recent events to trump up an argument for the success of those policies.

Over the past two off-seasons, we have added depth to this roster by keeping more of our draft picks and being more careful in free agency. We're on the right path now.

[corrupt3d]

Jason is a good athlete, so Zorn had that to work with. But, he took a QB who seemed best suited for a deep-throwing vertical offense, the kind he was drafted to run, and made him tighter, quicker and more accurate. I doubt that's ever been done before.

What's your point? So? It's working, is that a bad thing?

[Chachie]

The fact is Gibbs built this team...

:applause:

I love Zorn but he's playing guys that Gibbs molded into strong-charactered athletes. I'm not making a statement on anything lacking in Jim. I'm just agreeing that the offensive core is the beating heart of JJG with a better-suited coach for the modern game.

[Larry Brown #43]

Okay. You originally said "NO TEAM" had depth. So now that we've agreed that was wrong...

You misquoted me here. Go back and check that again. I said no team has GREAT depth. In fact, I capitalized the word GREAT. Some teams have better depth than others obviously, and I believe ours is better than most. I also said the Giants probably have the best depth in the league.

Three TDs by three different players and over 350 yards and 24 points is not a great defensive showing.

I was referring to the point where we lost Smoot and Springs...from that point to the end of the game. We shut them down, when logic would tell you they should have torched us.

You mean like in 2006?

I'm talking about the current roster.

First of all, Marcus Washington, Rocky McIntosh, Sean Taylor, and Carlos Rogers were never all out at the same time.

Well Rocky, Sean and Carlos certainly were all out at the same time during the stretch run, and Marcus was in and out of the lineup and far from 100% during that time.

And our defense played very well. Todd Collins played great, but didn't play one defensive snap all year.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

You can say that about any team that has a coaching change....

Yeah, Zorn revamped the roster just as much as Gibbs did lol ...

And we all saw how Wade Phillips rebuilt the Cowboys....

And what about that roster overhaul that Norv Turner accomplished in San Diego?...

[Shilsu]

You misquoted me here. Go back and check that again. I said no team has GREAT depth. In fact, I capitalized the word GREAT. Some teams have better depth than others obviously, and I believe ours is better than most. I also said the Giants probably have the best depth in the league.

The team can lose their #1 WR, their HOF DE, their #1 DE, their #1 RB and still be a top offensive team, a top defensive team, the leading team in sacks... Uhhh, what do you qualify as great depth? And even if no team can get great depth, how about the Redskins get depth on par with the better teams?

I was referring to the point where we lost Smoot and Springs...from that point to the end of the game. We shut them down, when logic would tell you they should have torched us.

Logic would tell you that since the offense controlled the tempo of the game, and particulary the second half, taking up 20 out of 30 minutes, that the Cowboys would not be able to torch us in that short span of a time. But they did score two touchdowns.

I'm talking about the current roster.

So instead of taking the whole body of work, we hone in a really really small sample size?

Well Rocky, Sean and Carlos certainly were all out at the same time during the stretch run, and Marcus was in and out of the lineup and far from 100% during that time.

Okay, and they were 1-5. What does that tell you?

And our defense played very well. Todd Collins played great, but didn't play one defensive snap all year.

Right, when Todd Collins came in, we just went 4-0.

So your insinuating that we won 4 straight because of our defensive depth and not Todd Collins is pretty insulting considering that same defensive "depth" went 1-5. Are you saying we actually added by subtraction in that having Rocky McIntosh injured actually enabled to us to win four straight? That can't be right either, considering he was injured in the Giants game.