RocketCitySkins Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 Gibbs in a Washington Times article called JC "impressive" after 16 starts. That would have been after the Eagles game in which JC had a 114 qb rating but the Redskins still loss the game. The next game was with Dallas and the Skins loss by 5 points. So according the this guy Gibbs was going to bench JC before the Tampa game. He would really have had a change of mind in less than 2 weeks time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lavarleap56 Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 also i did post this exact same info on the board on sunday night in the " loss of identity thread" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lavarleap56 Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 Gibbs in a Washington Times article called JC "impressive" after 16 starts. That would have been after the Eagles game in which JC had a 114 qb rating but the Redskins still loss the game. The next game was with Dallas and the Skins loss by 5 points. So according the this guy Gibbs was going to bench JC before the Tampa game. He would really have had a change of mind in less than 2 weeks time. Gibbs did not criticize players in the media and Was leaning towards going with Collins after 2 years of Saunders being in his ear that Collins could run The Saunders offense. Gibbs and Saunders tried to run a combination of there offenses with Campbell starting but it wasn't working. The death of Sean Taylor and he buffalo game with the two timeouts obviously stunned Gibbs and he didn't want to be a hindrance to the players on the team as they had there mind set to honor Sean by winning games and Collins was the best choice to open up the offense and try and get that done. Essentially after the timeout fiasco Gibbs took on the role of maintaining the teams emotional well being vs dictating x's and o's and let go off the offense to Saunders and look what happen. Gibbs left because of the realization that maybe he couldn't make all the right decisions anymore and was holding the team back in some regards, and the realization that his grandson wasn't guaranteed tomorrow with his disease and he turned the keys over and went along for the ride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 It was lunacy not to have an open competition.Also lunacy for Zorn to announce JC as the starter before even seeing him practice. And, lunacy that Dan or Vinny could dictate that. :doh: Yeah, it is lunacy to actually find out if you have something with the young QB you spent three picks on and have two years left on his rookie QB. Anyways, the point would have been moot because Collins didn't look good enough to win the job in preseason anyways. As for the article, it wouldn't surprise me. Gibbs benched a few QBs in his first run if it meant winning games. In 1987, he switched a lot between Jay and Doug and Rypien even got benched at some point. It doesn't mean much in what he thought of those QBs overall, tho. Getting benched by Gibbs wasn't a death sentence to your career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish50 Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 no that is not speculating. Williams during his interviews was on the same page as Gibbs was actually. Williams was going to keep Saunders and give him 100% control of the offense and there was going to be a open competion for the starters job in camp but Williams leant toward Collins because he made the overall team more effective. Campbell vs Collins was a issue as some felt Campbell was a franchise QB that just needed proper grooming. Williams wouldn't guarantee Campbell the starter for this season and people didn't like that. Why do you think the first thing Zorn said after his maroon and black comment was Campbell is my Unquestioned starter during his press conference. Yeah, and the people that didn't like that were Little Danny and Vinnie. This could possibly be the main reason why Williams was let go. Maybe he told the two headed monster that he had no faith in JC to lead the team and the only guarantee he would give them concerning JC was that he (JC), would have every opportunity to compete for the starting QB position. Maybe, after several other interviews with potential HC's, the two headed monster was getting the same answers from the interviewees. The only person who was hired to transform JC into a pro-type QB was Zorn, who apparently was convinced he could do the job, so what better person to hire as the Redskins new HC, who was fully committed to making JC into a legitimate starter. It's just a theory and maybe a dumb one but nothing about the hiring of Zorn made a lot of sense anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted December 9, 2008 Author Share Posted December 9, 2008 One has to wonder if Zorn is even allowed to bench JC right now without worrying about losing his own job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttr77 Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 I wouldn't be surprised for a second to find out that Snyder and Cerrato's love affair with JC at least played a part in Gibbs' decision to leave. When he left the first time, there were reports that he knew that he wouldn't be able to win with the players on the roster. Perhaps the circumstances are somewhat similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lavarleap56 Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 honestly i cant falt anyone for how the Campbell situation has played out. The organization had to find out what it had in him this year to decide on a contract extension or not especially more so due to the collective bargaining agreement issues. I actually think it was pretty prudent even tough the team suffered on the field. Campbell being given a huge extension and not being 100% sure he was the franchise type QB could of crippled this team for the future. The organizations other option would of been to let him test the market and see what his value was set at but the Dockery situation still leaves a bitter taste in peoples mouths and if Campbell left and ended up being a franchise QB for another team Snyder would of never came back from that with the fans or media. Damned if you do and damned if you don't kinda deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted December 9, 2008 Author Share Posted December 9, 2008 Damned if you do and damned if you don't kinda deal. Fair point. Unfortuntately, it's one year later and we still have no idea what we have in Campbell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zCommander Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 One has to wonder if Zorn is even allowed to bench JC right now without worrying about losing his own job. Well according to Cooley this morning even if we don't get into the playoffs, Zorn is not going to change the personal on the field. Said he is not like that. Damn I really wanted to see what Colt can do if we didn't make the playoffs. Oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonny9TD Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 One has to wonder if Zorn is even allowed to bench JC right now without worrying about losing his own job. He probably does. Unless he puts Collins or Brennan in. That way I'll know if Dan Snyder and Vinny are deciding who plays to justify billions of dollars. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skull1669 Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 Nah, he would have stuck with Todd.I think the fact that he thought about benching JC before he got hurt speaks volumes of what he thought of his potential. Why did he waste a draft pick on him then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ST is my boy Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 Well according to Cooley this morning even if we don't get into the playoffs, Zorn is not going to change the personal on the field. Said he is not like that. Damn I really wanted to see what Colt can do if we didn't make the playoffs. Oh well. Sure am glad hes the coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 LL56's explanation makes perfect sense, and pretty simply explains what went down with the whole coaching search. It seems pretty clear that development of Campbell/a franchise QB was the #1 criteria on the prerequisite list for a new coach. They had the investment in Campbell, so it makes sense that there is where the team had to start. And I don't see a big issue with this. If I'm looking for a coach, you can be damn sure that one of my biggest concerns is going to be what that coach envisions from the QB position. Zorn was hired in order to develop the QB position. His name was mentioned by different people in interviews, and that is what got Zorn's foot in the door. Now, he's had a shot to evaluate his roster and coaching staff. From this point forward, he has to be able to call the shots. And that includes replacing Campbell, if need be. Crazy as this may seem, the Redskins don't have the worst OL in the league (well, before they last CS & JJ :doh:). It's not even amongst the worst. I can't really evaluate the OL or the receivers (other than that they need to start making the difficult plays), because I think the problems are initiated in the inadequate QB play and offensive design/playcalling (hey, Jim, you have a Pro Bowl TE - think you might want to design a few plays for that?). Therein lies the root of the offensive woes, and it won't get better until those issues are addressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted December 9, 2008 Author Share Posted December 9, 2008 Why did he waste a draft pick on him then? Because he thought he had potential. Just didn't work out the way he hoped or he simply thought the team was better off with someone else under center. It happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllBusiness Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 I find this all very interesting. And some cloudy moves in the past have been made a bit clearer to me now. I just hope Zorn is allowed to stay in Washington. He just seems like a great long-term fit. I believe Brennan is our future. Nothing personal against Campbell. But he's too slow. If we lose one more game, I still think Jim runs out the season with Jason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 Fair point. Unfortuntately, it's one year later and we still have no idea what we have in Campbell. WE may not, but I suspect Zorn, et al. have a pretty good idea. There was a story early in the season about Campbell contract talks being broached. We recently heard about there being no discussions. Maybe both stories are false. Still, I think no extension this offseason will clearly show that the organization is of the mind that Campbell is not the guy, and that it will take a significant about-face for that to change. If they were encouraged by his development, they would have offered an extension by now. You don't let encouraging QB prospects get to a lame duck season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SolidSnake84 Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 Well, i dont want to put anyone in a bad mood, but it's been discussed on here before that when Jim Fassel was a leading candidate for the HC job, one of the things asked to him was what he thought about JC. Coach Fassel didn't feel set on Jason as the starter and wanted to have a competition for the job, just like Coach Gibbs did, or any realistic coach would. So it's clear that Mr. Snyder wanted a coach who would leave JC in no matter what.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted December 9, 2008 Author Share Posted December 9, 2008 Well, i dont want to put anyone in a bad mood, but it's been discussed on here before that when Jim Fassel was a leading candidate for the HC job, one of the things asked to him was what he thought about JC.Coach Fassel didn't feel set on Jason as the starter and wanted to have a competition for the job, just like Coach Gibbs did, or any realistic coach would. So it's clear that Mr. Snyder wanted a coach who would leave JC in no matter what.... And it's also clear that a lot of coaches who either saw JC every day or watched him on film didn't think he should be the starter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buck812 Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 I would like to know HOW he knew that??? I will tell you this... He knew just about as much as any of you knew it. The media can really get peoples panties in a wad on ES with a quickness! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 i heard Riggins on the radio say and I'm paraphrasing, [ jim fassel was going to be the redskins coach until he told vinny that he thought campbell wasn't the answer at QB. That if Fassel became coach he would find someone else to run the offense] riggins was told by someone as he put it,"High up on the redskin's ladder". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skull1669 Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 Because he thought he had potential. Just didn't work out the way he hoped or he simply thought the team was better off with someone else under center.It happens. He has only played in 33 games which equals 2 seasons. Eli Manning game didnt start to pick up until his 4th season. I had always said Gibbs should have started Campbell his rookie year and we would know what kind of QB he would be by now. Campbell deserves at least 1 more year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 So it's clear that Mr. Snyder wanted a coach who would leave JC in no matter what.... Again, there is nothing wrong with this. QB is far and away the most important position on the team - if you have a franchise QB, the team is set as a long-term contender. The team had a player on the roster that had been acquired with a significant investment and had shown some tantalizing qualities - just not consistently. A decision on that player's contract really needed to be made within the next year or so (and we're talking BIG bucks). Him winning a QB battle was no sure thing - nor was him losing one completely damning, either. A year of him sitting on the bench would probably seal his fate here in DC, w/o the question of whether he could play or not really being answered. So, find someone who will play him. It's not like Campbell is a disaster - he just is apparently not a guy who elevates the team's level of play. He's part of the mix rather than being the active ingredient. Playing him this season may or may not have cost them games (given the alternative of Collins), but it may very well have given them a definitive sense of his long-term prospects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Emrys Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 honestly i cant falt anyone for how the Campbell situation has played out. The organization had to find out what it had in him this year to decide on a contract extension or not especially more so due to the collective bargaining agreement issues. I actually think it was pretty prudent even tough the team suffered on the field. Campbell being given a huge extension and not being 100% sure he was the franchise type QB could of crippled this team for the future. The organizations other option would of been to let him test the market and see what his value was set at but the Dockery situation still leaves a bitter taste in peoples mouths and if Campbell left and ended up being a franchise QB for another team Snyder would of never came back from that with the fans or media.Damned if you do and damned if you don't kinda deal. No, as you said, they had to find out more about Campbell. The only area that we can find fault is the tension between continuity and QB development with which Snyder and Cerrato wrestled. Throughout their search and after it was concluded, they stressed a need for continuity. I think they hoped they had found one that acheived both - a new head coach to develop Jason and the majority of the coaching staff intact. In hindsight they clearly chose the QB and probably should have made that more clear. This could have kept them out of the damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario. At least expectations would have been more tepid, maybe. Cerrato's real miscalculation this year was that the o-line had more tread on its tires. I just hope the poor line play doesn't cloud the coaches and Cerrato's evaluation of Jason. Hopefully they know what they have either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted December 9, 2008 Author Share Posted December 9, 2008 My concern is not that Snyder wanted to find out what he had in his young qb. It makes sense. My concern is that so many coaches who either saw Campbell every day in practice or watched him on film told Vinny and Dan they didn't think he was the guy. I mean, Jim Fassel wanted an open competition. Fassel! That guy would do anything for a NFL gig. I hope they were all wrong and JC steps it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.