Did you support Mark Brunell in 2006?

[Raub]

Shhhh....stop mentioning him before he comes back....please. Think of the children.

Next thing you know, you'll start comparing McIntosh to Holdman. :yikes:

[eljeasel]

We want more offensive production. I think that means that Zorn, the O line, the receivers, the RBs and the QB need to improve. I can't reduce the problem to "he" -- meaning the QB.

OF, I agree with you 110%

[wahaj23]

Here's something we're missing here. Our team finished, what, 6-10 in 2006? Now, the way I view it is if we lose today that's two games difference.

But our defense was AWFUL that year and our defense this year is a top-5 type defensive squad. Also, no Clinton Portis for much of the year.

And since Jason's numbers are quite similar to Mark's in 2006, I think it might be fair to expect that WITH a Clinton Portis, with a top 5 type defense--that we'd be better than 9-7 or last in the division.

Wouldn't you?

The problem is that even with fairly similar numbers and 'better QB play' Jason has led the team to a mediocre record that is kind of an improvement over a team that had a brand new system in the run and pass game and an awful defense and was missing it's best offensive player.

Also, what about the 2004 season? Didnt we have a stud D and 1300 yard RB (although Portis had a low YPC average). Wouldnt you have expected a better record than 6-10? The fact is you cant blame one guy for going 8-8 or 9-7. Ya sure you can point to Campbell and say he can play better but you could prolly do that for almost all the players on this years squad (expect some of the D players)

[DieselPwr44]

So your going to compare Campbell to Brady, Brees and Manning. Come on now, we all know Campbell isnt that good.

Campbell is in a new system, you have to give him more than a year. How did Brees do when he first started out with the Chargers?

"We ran the base offense in college"- Campbell before the season.

"Everyone runs the same stuff,the vocabulary is just different." ARE and Cooley on Sirius NFL Radio before the season.

So which is it? Is the offense old hat or is it too complicated for college educated men to pick up??

Campbell and the team can't have it both ways.

Gregg Williams' defensive scheme was generally regarded to be complex with numerous packages and various blitzes. The defensive players didn't seem to have any trouble picking it up from the get go.

Yet year after year we hear excuse after excuse about:

How the offense is too complicated

Jason needs more time in the system

Yet the league has numerous examples,today and throughout history, of players changing teams and systems with no problem adapting.

For the past 4 years the Washington Redskins have been molly coddling Jason Campbell only to still get mediocre performance in return.

Maybe as a fanbase, alot of us are used to medicre QB performance because with the exception of a year here or there, that's all we've known for the past 17 seasons.

Why do we keep settling for mediocre??

[Hunter_R]

Tom Brady had a great o-line

guys like Deon Branch and Troy Brown got some seperation, and could catch the ball

2007: Tom Brady sacked 21 times.

2008: Matt Cassel sacked 46 times with 1 game to go.

Same o-line.

[DieselPwr44]

Tom Brady had a great o-line

guys like Deon Branch and Troy Brown got some seperation, and could catch the ball

Before Moss and Welker, Brady had an Old Troy Brown who was cut in camp and then brought back and Reche "Bug Eyes" Caldwell and went to the AFC championship game vs the Colts.

Are Moss and ARE on that level or not?

[wahaj23]

"We ran the base offense in college"- Campbell before the season.

"Everyone runs the same stuff,the vocabulary is just different." ARE and Cooley on Sirius NFL Radio before the season.

So which is it? Is the offense old hat or is it too complicated for college educated men to pick up??

Campbell and the team can't have it both ways.

Gregg Williams' defensive scheme was generally regarded to be complex with numerous packages and various blitzes. The defensive players didn't seem to have any trouble picking it up from the get go.

Yet year after year we hear excuse after excuse about:

How the offense is too complicated

Jason needs more time in the system

Yet the league has numerous examples,today and throughout history, of players changing teams and systems with no problem adapting.

For the past 4 years the Washington Redskins have been molly coddling Jason Campbell only to still get mediocre performance in return.

Maybe as a fanbase, alot of us are used to medicre QB performance because with the exception of a year here or there, that's all we've known for the past 17 seasons.

Why do we keep settling for mediocre??

So your point is that since the base offense is the same, Campbell should be able to easily pick it up. I mean the base offense for almost all the NFL systems is similiar and then we have slight variation.

Campbell might have the "base offense" down but you have to give him more than one year to actually understand the variations in a systems. A variation is what makes each system different and the reason why we dont have each NFL team running the same offense.

Everyone can run the same stuff, ya I agree with this, the base offense is prolly pretty similiar but each system has a certain variation, hence the reason they are different systems.

And this is the first year we are hearing that Campbell needs more time in THIS system, we dont hear this year after year.

[wahaj23]

Before Moss and Welker, Brady had an Old Troy Brown who was cut in camp and then brought back and Reche "Bug Eyes" Caldwell and went to the AFC championship game vs the Colts.

Are Moss and ARE on that level or not?

I think we have been through this...no one here is comparing JC to Brady and I doubt anyone would. I dont understand the Brady-JC comparison.

[MustangSteve]

:applause

And let's not forget that Brunell broke the NFL record for strait completions in a game, and did it by throwing longer then 4 yard passes. JC can't even get the short passes right.

[Ghost of]

Also, what about the 2004 season? Didnt we have a stud D and 1300 yard RB (although Portis had a low YPC average). Wouldnt you have expected a better record than 6-10?

Uhhhh, you just made my point for me. IN 2004, IT WAS Brunell at fault for his AWFUL QB play. Joe Gibbs should have probably benched him 4 games into the season (it would have only taken me one game, and I have the thread to prove it from that post-game) and it was BRUNELL that was the reason we couldn't move the ball, score points or keep the defense well-rested. Essentially, we sacrificed 2004 to Brunell. In 2006, at least, Brunell wasn't as god-awful and we had a bad D.

Thank for making my point. When the other pieces are in place, yes, you expect the QB and the passing game to deliver. We didn't get to the playoffs in 2004 because of poor QB play.

Thanks again!

[DallasSucks19922010]

When is 10 points a game and 3 points outside of a turnover deep in Philly territory acceptable production from the offense, LET ALONE 'everything he can do to win games?'

Jason Campbell cant block, get open, and throw to himself. Football is a team sport where everyone needs to do their job to be successful. When everyone was doing their job then a couple analysts were considering him an MVP candidate.

[Ghost of]

2007: Tom Brady sacked 21 times.

2008: Matt Cassel sacked 46 times with 1 game to go.

Same o-line.

The people we're debating are not reasonable individuals, they are True Believers or Deceivers. There is no point they will bring up that is actually being used to further debate. If you point out the stat you did, they'll say something else or shift the conversation or distract. They're not interested in debate, just in being shills for an ineffective QB because you'd never have this thread even on a Carolina board, let alone New Orleans, Indy, etc. Or if you did, it would be a laughingstock thread.

As for the line, the Patriots line wasn't regarded as 'great' until much more recently. They were mediocre/subpar in Brady's first few years (at best.) So that's all a big lie, anyway. It's been debunked a billion times and people who didn't follow those conversations still bring it up.

When it's thoroughly trashed, they then say, "Well isn't important to see Cassel as proving that overall talent and coaching matters?!" I don't know. Was Steve Young a product of that system or was he a great QB? Joe Montana went on to be pretty good a couple years in KC, didn't he? I don't know. Some teams scout Qbs better?

[Ghost of]

Jason Campbell cant block, get open, and throw to himself. Football is a team sport where everyone needs to do their job to be successful. When everyone was doing their job then a couple analysts were considering him an MVP candidate.

But smarter people on our own board said it was Portis and that we were not truly beating people up on the scoreboard and part of it was because we were just Barely sufficient in the pass game.

As for the rest of your post, that's silly and could be applied to any QB even someone that's out of the league in a couple of years. Guys were open, he was MISSING them and not throwing the ball well against Philly or were you inebriated for the entire experience?

[Ghost of]

Maybe as a fanbase, alot of us are used to medicre QB performance because with the exception of a year here or there, that's all we've known for the past 17 seasons.

Why do we keep settling for mediocre??

That's exactly what's happened. It's like all of them thinking Brunell was 'great' in 2005. No, he was competent until he got injured but wasn't very good in that string of losses we had (San Diego and and Oakland leap out in my mind.)

But yeah, if Trent Green had actually stayed here, there is no way in hell we would be so tolerant of this sub-mediocre play at QB.

Also, I get a Coach Yost from Remember the Titans vibe with some of them (if you recall the scene where Boone tells him to stop coddling the black players and not go soft on them) when I compare how tolerant they are of Campbell vs. other QBs who actually DID something like lead us to playoffs or FINISH a season strong.

[wahaj23]

Uhhhh, you just made my point for me. IN 2004, IT WAS Brunell at fault for his AWFUL QB play. Joe Gibbs should have probably benched him 4 games into the season (it would have only taken me one game, and I have the thread to prove it from that post-game) and it was BRUNELL that was the reason we couldn't move the ball, score points or keep the defense well-rested. Essentially, we sacrificed 2004 to Brunell. In 2006, at least, Brunell wasn't as god-awful and we had a bad D.

Thank for making my point. When the other pieces are in place, yes, you expect the QB and the passing game to deliver. We didn't get to the playoffs in 2004 because of poor QB play.

Thanks again!

Unforuntely you didnt get my point. You posted earlier saying good D + good RB means 10 win plus season. My point was that in 2004 we had this but this wasnt the case at all. And if you seriously want to say Brunell was the ONLY problem we had in 2004 then you have some rosy colored gibbs-like glasses. No doubt Brunell was horrible, but if you seriously want to compare Brunells 2004 stats to Campbells, go right ahead.

But by all means, if you want to go deeper into 2004, fine by me. We also had a new system in 2004 as well, just like in 2008. And you failed to realize by greater point by bringing up 2004--you cant just sit back and blame it all on 1 guy, we had a lot of other issues in 2004 as well.

[SkinsNumberOne]

2007: Tom Brady sacked 21 times.

2008: Matt Cassel sacked 46 times with 1 game to go.

Same o-line.

Yeah, that team has really struggled with Matt Cassel. That is a great point. HORRIBLE!

[Ghost of]

Yeah, that team has really struggled with Matt Cassel. That is a great point. HORRIBLE!

Huh? Wait, are people allowed to make a claim (about the O-line problems being the main source of trouble) and then if someone presents countering evidence, that is not allowed if the team used as evidence still has success? Is that what you are saying? I hope you weren't being sarcastic, except you were which would mark you as far more partisan in this debate than you claimed to be previously. Disappointing from the person who pretended to be something else.

But the whole point of saying "O-line is at fault" is to absolve Campbell (or any other QB who isn't performing) of any blame. But when evidence is presented that runs counter to the hypothesis advanced--that's a bad point?

Maybe the team has been pretty good with Cassel BECAUSE there are other elements in place (like a good QB or one who at least knows what they want) besides offensive line?

It's like Brunell being sacked 50 times in 1996 and somehow still throwing for 4K and getting to the conference championship game. But I guess it's ALWAYS the offensive line, never anything else.

It might be why San Fran and Green Bay produced QBs. Not just because of coaching or even 'good scouting' but because they had good QBs who could be examples to the younger guys. Jason had Brunell, which is probably why he plays like he does.

[CrypticVillain]

When is 10 points a game and 3 points outside of a turnover deep in Philly territory acceptable production from the offense, LET ALONE 'everything he can do to win games?'

I gotta give Campbell one more season in this offense. IF he struggles, then he needs to pull a WWE and "Get the "F" out"

[Ant15fromNJ]

I want Campbell OUTTTTT! The guys never going to be anything IMO. Never passes for good yardage, he just wont kill us but we need a QB that is a difference in winning.

[tonyriggins]

Was Gibbs an idoit or had too big of an ego? People was mad at Brunell but heck it was Gibbs decesion. Not only did I not support his Brunell decesion in 06, but in 05 I called for Brunell to be benched and got ripped by most.

[SkinsNumberOne]

Huh? Wait, are people allowed to make a claim (about the O-line problems being the main source of trouble) and then if someone presents countering evidence, that is not allowed if the team used as evidence still has success? Is that what you are saying? I hope you weren't being sarcastic, except you were which would mark you as far more partisan in this debate than you claimed to be previously. Disappointing from the person who pretended to be something else.

But the whole point of saying "O-line is at fault" is to absolve Campbell (or any other QB who isn't performing) of any blame. But when evidence is presented that runs counter to the hypothesis advanced--that's a bad point?

Maybe the team has been pretty good with Cassel BECAUSE there are other elements in place (like a good QB or one who at least knows what they want) besides offensive line?

It's like Brunell being sacked 50 times in 1996 and somehow still throwing for 4K and getting to the conference championship game. But I guess it's ALWAYS the offensive line, never anything else.

It might be why San Fran and Green Bay produced QBs. Not just because of coaching or even 'good scouting' but because they had good QBs who could be examples to the younger guys. Jason had Brunell, which is probably why he plays like he does.

I am confused about your first paragraph. I'm saying that their good offensive line has helped them achieve consistency without relying on a Tom Brady to lead them.

I don't really care about how many sacks the QB allows. It really doesn't bother me. I care about teams winning games. Get sacked a million times, if you can get me 11 wins (they just won again today), I'll be happy. Posting sack numbers and acting like Cassel didn't do his job (with a good team behind him) seems kind of weird when we're talking about an 11-win team.

Is that clear enough?

*By the way, it's important to note that at the end of the day we're not necessarily going to find agreement. I respect a lot of the points you've made, many of them have good backing. Elsewhere someone made the same comparison between Brunell and Campbell that you like to make, and I explained why I thought it wasn't really a good comparison (not wanting to rehash here). These things aren't provable. It's very easy to look at teams and say "Oh look at that QB" and attribute so much to the QB. It's very easy, that doesn't make it correct. A good or even well-timed rushing attack can provide much needed balance - contributing to that is the OLine (how many times does Portis get hit by DLine or very quickly, particularly in our losses). If teams can drop more people into coverage, then you're going to see a QB hold onto the ball more.

[alwaysaskin]

Uhhhh, you just made my point for me. IN 2004, IT WAS Brunell at fault for his AWFUL QB play. Joe Gibbs should have probably benched him 4 games into the season (it would have only taken me one game, and I have the thread to prove it from that post-game) and it was BRUNELL that was the reason we couldn't move the ball, score points or keep the defense well-rested. Essentially, we sacrificed 2004 to Brunell. In 2006, at least, Brunell wasn't as god-awful and we had a bad D.

Thank for making my point. When the other pieces are in place, yes, you expect the QB and the passing game to deliver. We didn't get to the playoffs in 2004 because of poor QB play.

Thanks again!

Umm, yeah whatever, we lost Jansen for the year in 2004 in the Hall of fame game, Brunell played most of the season hurt, but of course the Ramsey man crush continues. I know maybe we can get Ramsey back next year and when we look like the Lions all the Ramsey man crushers can talk about Zorn ruined Ramsey and how it was never Patrick ramsey's fault.

Portis had a horrible YPC, in other words he got 1300 yards on 343 carries with a 3.8 YPC, Portis had to run the ball 22 times a game, but wait that was Brunnell's fault because after all Ramsey was Montana, Manning, Marino and Brady all rolled into one impressive package!

Who was our number one receiver in 2004? Oh that's right Lavernius Coles, our #2? Taylor Jacobs! Coles had 950 whopping receiving Yards!

We lost Jansen and Thomas, had virtually no running game and a guy (Coles) that I hate so much I want nothing good to happen to him.

I'm tired of the Ramsey crush that some still have, he was a reach in the first round in 2002, he was first round bust and could't beat Pennington or Clemons in new York

[Shilsu]

Umm, yeah whatever, we lost Jansen for the year in 2004 in the Hall of fame game, Brunell played most of the season hurt, but of course the Ramsey man crush continues. I know maybe we can get Ramsey back next year and when we look like the Lions all the Ramsey man crushers can talk about Zorn ruined Ramsey and how it was never Patrick ramsey's fault.

Portis had a horrible YPC, in other words he got 1300 yards on 343 carries with a 3.8 YPC, Portis had to run the ball 22 times a game, but wait that was Brunnell's fault because after all Ramsey was Montana, Manning, Marino and Brady all rolled into one impressive package!

Who was our number one receiver in 2004? Oh that's right Lavernius Coles, our #2? Taylor Jacobs! Coles had 950 whopping receiving Yards!

We lost Jansen and Thomas, had virtually no running game and a guy (Coles) that I hate so much I want nothing good to happen to him.

I'm tired of the Ramsey crush that some still have, he was a reach in the first round in 2002, he was first round bust and could't beat Pennington or Clemons in new York

Dude... Why are you defending Brunell...

In 2004...

Brunell completed 49.8% of his passes and had a QB rating of 63.9 against lesser competition in the games he started...

In the games Ramsey started, he completed 65.4% of his passes and had a QB rating of 89.4 against a much tougher schedule...

That's a huge difference.

[Ghost of]

Dude... Why are you defending Brunell...

In 2004...

Brunell completed 49.8% of his passes and had a QB rating of 63.9 against lesser competition in the games he started...

In the games Ramsey started, he completed 65.4% of his passes and had a QB rating of 89.4 against a much tougher schedule...

That's a huge difference.

What was interesting to me is that in 2005 when the team did better, Brunell and even Gibbs basically said there was better talent on the team than 2004. Basically, tossing Coles and Gardner out into the fire, without even thinking that with a different QB the offense was better than it was with Brunell. Brunell was hurting that year but he sucked in any sense.

Again, people would rather blame the surrounding talent than the QB. Thought it was pretty classless of Brunell to do that.