Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted February 20, 2009 Author Share Posted February 20, 2009 Uhh, no, my many posts with statistical evidence, and my assertions being supported by Zorn (biggest problem at the opponents 49-20) and Moslely (Offense regression coinciding with injuries on the OL) just a day later is my proof. Moseley is an outside source, and since he's an ex-Cowboy, wouldn't that give him more reason to trash the QB?Embarrassing is sticking with a biased opinion despite statistics and people more qualified than you or I suggesting otherwise. theres no evidence until you can prove that the sacks were because of our oline and not because of campbell himself. zorn blabbing to the media means absolute zero, as does an espn blogger. i told you if i get time ill go back and check every sack if i can get my vids to work. ill figure out tonight if i get time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ST is my boy Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 man, if you guys keep up the crying ill just start referring to him as "soul glo" in all these discussions. That'll make you cool!!! :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 It's also very possible that defensive coordinators saw that this team was either unwilling or unable to go deep so they brought their safeties up. Suddenly, the holes are not there for CP and the blitzes are more effective. A few simple deep connections could have backed them off and made the entire offense more effective. It's a chicken-and-egg theory, but all of these units feed off of each other. actually you have backwards, defenses where playing up the first half but as CP started getting injured, they kept the safeties back, not fearing the run game. Getting pressure with their front seven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 on a side note, when vinny was fired by the skins in 2001, he was a blogger for espn as well. shows how smart you have to be to blog for espn lol. Yeah, you're so much smarter than any of them. How many teams have won Superbowls while you were there? It's embarassing you, some guy on the internet, is trying to discredit people who actually work in football, simply because they don't agree with you. I wonder if Moseley had said it was all Campbell's fault if you'd still be trying to discredit him? Something tells me no. But let's ignore anyone with insider knowledge and access to players and coaches, and instead listen to the childish rantings on Jason Campbell from a man so obsessed he makes fun of JC in his sig, saying "soul glo must go." Yeah, I really expect an impartial deabte there . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbodiesel#44 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 It's also very possible that defensive coordinators saw that this team was either unwilling or unable to go deep so they brought their safeties up. Suddenly, the holes are not there for CP and the blitzes are more effective. A few simple deep connections could have backed them off and made the entire offense more effective. It's a chicken-and-egg theory, but all of these units feed off of each other. Agreed, but I would lean towards unable to go deep. JC never had enough time to wait on his WR's to go deep, and they were always well covered because our other options were staying home to block. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttr77 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 but is that the fault of the QB or the playcallers not calling deep plays or the WRs not being able to get open deep? or a combination of all of them? Probably some sort of combination... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 It was funny reading this, and thinking about some of the comments people say about Campbell's abilities. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2005/draft/players/65730.html POSITIVES: Athletic passer who took his game to another level as a senior. Patient in the pocket, buys time for receivers and poised under pressure. Feels the rush, steps up to avoid it, then finds the open pass-catcher. Improved his reads in the pocket, displays solid field vision and overall awareness. Looks off the safety, goes through receiver progressions and does not force the ball if nothing.s available. Does not take bad sacks and always trying to make something positive happen. Keeps his eyes down the field rolling out, makes good decisions and runs with the ball as a last resort. Accurate between the hashes, displays a good sense of timing and improved his pass placement as a senior. Effective at the Senior Bowl in a West Coast timing offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 man, if you guys keep up the crying ill says the pot to the kettle stop making excuses :cry: I'm tired of hearing this OL nonsense :cry: no it's just the other side that does it... :thumbsup: :rotflmao: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 theres no evidence until you can prove that the sacks were because of our oline and not because of campbell himself. zorn blabbing to the media means absolute zero, as does an espn blogger. i told you if i get time ill go back and check every sack if i can get my vids to work. ill figure out tonight if i get time. Well gee, we have 38 sacks, from the previous seasons mark of 27 sacks. We have an OL that's even older, and even more injured. We have a QB who improved in every statstical category. Hmm, I wonder who's giving up sacks? Funny how you say I can't prove the sacks were the fault of the OL, though the stats certainly suggest it, yet you have no problem asserting the sacks are JC's fault, eventhough you have no evidence either, other than observation, which I too have. The difference is I have stats that suggest it's the OL, while you have jack squat. And it's not about Zorn and Mosely blabbing to the media. If you weren't so quick to dismiss anyone that disagrees with you you might actually get the point, which is the things I was saying the stats suggested have now been backed up by people who work for the team and who cover the NFL. You're assertions have only been backed by posters on this board who can't go one day without posting something insulting about a person on this team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttr77 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 actually you have backwards, defenses where playing up the first half but as CP started getting injured, they kept the safeties back, not fearing the run game. Getting pressure with their front seven. Admittedly, I haven't gone back and re-watched the film on all games (my gluttony for punishment ends on the last game of the year) but this appears to go against every defensive strategy in the history of the NFL. If the other team doesn't try to go deep, don't defend it. Not 'if the RB is hurt, back off'. ESPECIALLY when almost all routes were designed to go less than 10 yards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted February 20, 2009 Author Share Posted February 20, 2009 Yeah, you're so much smarter than any of them. How many teams have won Superbowls while you were there? It's embarassing you, some guy on the internet, is trying to discredit people who actually work in football, simply because they don't agree with you. I wonder if Moseley had said it was all Campbell's fault if you'd still be trying to discredit him? Something tells me no. But let's ignore anyone with insider knowledge and access to players and coaches, and instead listen to the childish rantings on Jason Campbell from a man so obsessed he makes fun of JC in his sig, saying "soul glo must go." Yeah, I really expect an impartial deabte there . i didnt need other sources to help my opinion, hence i didnt go rooting through espn bloggers to help prove a point. you obviously did. and spare me childish nonsense. im sorry if i have a sense of humor and that our QB looks like eric la salle. if i took the sig out youd be complaining about something else. my sig is irrelevant to what im saying about JC. and agian, you still havent responded about proving whether the sacks are the olines fault or JCs fault. youve resorted to crying about my signature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 It was funny reading this, and thinking about some of the comments people say about Campbell's abilities. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2005/draft/players/65730.html these threads = :gus: you can't change a closed mind.... and unfortunately both sides refuse to budge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttr77 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 It was funny reading this, and thinking about some of the comments people say about Campbell's abilities. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2005/draft/players/65730.html Man, I had no idea Colt was so highly touted leaving college! Pretty cool! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ST is my boy Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 my sig is irrelevant to what im saying about JC Ummmm what??? Your Sig says he must go! But your whole point behind your post is that hes not very good and you dont like him. hmmmmmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted February 20, 2009 Author Share Posted February 20, 2009 Well gee, we have 38 sacks, from the previous seasons mark of 27 sacks. We have an OL that's even older, and even more injured. We have a QB who improved in every statstical category. Hmm, I wonder who's giving up sacks? we didnt play the ravens or the steelers the previous year, two of the biggest pass rushes. thats 9 of your sacks right there. and right, because campbell threw 1 more TD, 5 less picks, and had a 62 comp rating instead of a 60, theres no way he could have given up sacks. lord knows that makes sense....... Funny how you say I can't prove the sacks were the fault of the OL, though the stats certainly suggest it, yet you have no problem asserting the sacks are JC's fault, eventhough you have no evidence either, other than observation, which I too have. The difference is I have stats that suggest it's the OL, while you have jack squat. youve shown nothing to suggest it was the oline other than claiming they wore down and that they gave up 6 more sacks in the 2nd half when you claim they were worn down. And it's not about Zorn and Mosely blabbing to the media. If you weren't so quick to dismiss anyone that disagrees with you you might actually get the point, which is the things I was saying the stats suggested have now been backed up by people who work for the team and who cover the NFL. You're assertions have only been backed by posters on this board who can't go one day without posting something insulting about a person on this team. it is blabbing. mosley is a blogger, hes paid to blog about the nfc east. him just saying "the oline wore down" is the same as you just saying "the oline wore down". most of this board probably knwos more about the skins than some espn blogger. and as for zorn, im done with coach speak. it made no sense with gibbs, and im not gonna listen to zorns coach speak either. what he says to appease the press is not something im putting stock in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 i didnt need other sources to help my opinion, hence i didnt go rooting through espn bloggers to help prove a point. you obviously did. and spare me childish nonsense. im sorry if i have a sense of humor and that our QB looks like eric la salle. if i took the sig out youd be complaining about something else. my sig is irrelevant to what im saying about JC. and agian, you still havent responded about proving whether the sacks are the olines fault or JCs fault. youve resorted to crying about my signature. Obviously you do need outside help on your opinion, because the actual evidence says you are wrong. But just that comment right there at the beginning is all I need to know. "I'm right, I know I am, I don't care what anyone else says." Like I said, you've already made up your mind before seeing all the evidence, and now that the evidence suggests something else might have been going on, you stick to your opinion at all costs, no matter how foolish it makes you look, just to not say "I may have been wrong on this one." Your sig is completely relevant because the debate is about JC and we're trying to figure out the problem and stay impartial. How the hell you expect to stay impartial on JC with that sig is beyond me, and beyond delusional. It's also relevant because you started this thread with practically zero statistical analysis other than TDs, and combined with your sig and your attitude in here it's obvious you just started this thread to try and continue the JC bashing. And no, I did respond by saying you are hypocrite because you can't prove the sacks were all JC's fault, yet you assert such, but since I assert it is the OL, you say I can't prove it. That's a BS trap you're trying to make, and it isn't going to work. As I already said, the injuries to the OL coincided with the offenses regression, and now you have an outside source saying this as well, and many in the media saying also OL is a big need for us. there was no crying going on, so you can spare me that childish crap and actully try and discuss something like an adult. Seriously, grow up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted February 20, 2009 Author Share Posted February 20, 2009 Ummmm what??? Your Sig says he must go! But your whole point behind your post is that hes not very good and you dont like him. hmmmmmmm yes it does. ive seen 36 games of his. thats enough for me. im sorry you disagree. maybe you could try and add something to this convo? or maybe not. elkabong is doing all the work for you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 we didnt play the ravens or the steelers the previous year, two of the biggest pass rushes. thats 9 of your sacks right there. and right, because campbell threw 1 more TD, 5 less picks, and had a 62 comp rating instead of a 60, theres no way he could have given up sacks. lord knows that makes sense.......youve shown nothing to suggest it was the oline other than claiming they wore down and that they gave up 6 more sacks in the 2nd half when you claim they were worn down. it is blabbing. mosley is a blogger, hes paid to blog about the nfc east. him just saying "the oline wore down" is the same as you just saying "the oline wore down". most of this board probably knwos more about the skins than some espn blogger. and as for zorn, im done with coach speak. it made no sense with gibbs, and im not gonna listen to zorns coach speak either. what he says to appease the press is not something im putting stock in. Except Moseley is paid for his analysis, and he's paid as an around the league type, one who talks with personell from each team and then answers fans questions. Like I said, if Moseley agreed with you then you wouldn't be trying to discredit him at all. And coach speak and "we didn't do well at the opponents 49-20" are 2 completely different things. It's pretty sad you'd rather act like a baby and dismiss everything the other side is telling you, rather than actually try to discuss something. Whatever, sorry my friend, and I know you'll just say "I don't care, or respond similarily like a child, but you've lost a lot of credibility with me over these past 2 days now, not because of your words, but because of your attitude. You won't accept anything other than your own biased opinion, and thus there is no point in discussing the matter with you further. Goodbye and hopefully the next time we discuss something on here both sides will be willing to listen to each other. Until then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttr77 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 Apparently the discussion about the QB situation has morphed into a discussion about the merits of an ESPN blogger. As if his OPINION meant any more than ours, just because he writes the same crap we do on a different website. Well, he's smarter than us in that at least he gets paid for it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted February 20, 2009 Author Share Posted February 20, 2009 Obviously you do need outside help on your opinion, because the actual evidence says you are wrong. But just that comment right there at the beginning is all I need to know. "I'm right, I know I am, I don't care what anyone else says." Like I said, you've already made up your mind before seeing all the evidence, and now that the evidence suggests something else might have been going on, you stick to your opinion at all costs, no matter how foolish it makes you look, just to not say "I may have been wrong on this one."Your sig is completely relevant because the debate is about JC and we're trying to figure out the problem and stay impartial. How the hell you expect to stay impartial on JC with that sig is beyond me, and beyond delusional. It's also relevant because you started this thread with practically zero statistical analysis other than TDs, and combined with your sig and your attitude in here it's obvious you just started this thread to try and continue the JC bashing. And no, I did respond by saying you are hypocrite because you can't prove the sacks were all JC's fault, yet you assert such, but since I assert it is the OL, you say I can't prove it. That's a BS trap you're trying to make, and it isn't going to work. As I already said, the injuries to the OL coincided with the offenses regression, and now you have an outside source saying this as well, and many in the media saying also OL is a big need for us. there was no crying going on, so you can spare me that childish crap and actully try and discuss something like an adult. Seriously, grow up. lol, my mind is made up cause i looked at everything and came to conclusion that JC is failing, not everyone else. again, you seem to think i just woke up one morning and said "yep, ill just bash JC today". weve been over this, i was a huge supporter, but again 36 games is enough for me. you claim that he progressed in all these statistics from last year. his "progression" was extremely minimal. going up 1 TD, which is frankly regression because he played in 4 less games, throwing less picks, and adding 2% to his completion is not enough for me to get excited. obviously, it excites you somehow. your evidence holds no water because again, you cannot show that the 38 sacks were directly related to the oline wearing down. i said before i was going to watch the games again and look at the sacks and try and determine if it was the oline or him holding the ball too long. you didnt respond to this (if you did i didnt see it) and you just continued harping on your evidence, which at this point im not even sure what the hell it is, weve gone in 50 circles. and every post you have to throw in something about people making fun of players or insulting them or how i think i know more than xyz. why is that even necessary? and youre telling me to grow up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phishisthegreatstuff Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 the team JC plays on is much better than the one Ramsey played on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 your typical JLC detractor/hater response nanananananananana, I can't hear you, nanananananananana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 look, another JLC detractor/hater :rotflmao: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooka Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 i wasnt on this board in 04 or 05, were people still clamouring for ramsey to be given another shot? OOooooooooooooh man...This board was a pure ****storm. The Monday Night Miracle in Dallas gave Brunell some slack, but when we were 5-6 people were up in arms again. The Lavar situation was probably worse though. Starting a thread on Lavar was like an automatic one month ban. Board was crazy in 2005. IMO, the biggest factor in the success of a young QB is being lucky enough to be drafted by the right team. Ramsey has been snakebit. He got no support from Spurrier or Gibbs. Yet, he still outplayed every QB they threw up against him. It was a bad pick. Spurrier tried to trade him to Chicago after we drafted him. Well gee, we have 38 sacks, from the previous seasons mark of 27 sacks. We have an OL that's even older, and even more injured. We have a QB who improved in every statstical category. Hmm, I wonder who's giving up sacks? Older, yes. More injured, hell no. Line was in complete shambles at times in 2007. The healthier O-Line with Randy Thomas back was supposed to be the difference this season. Funny how you say I can't prove the sacks were the fault of the OL, though the stats certainly suggest it, yet you have no problem asserting the sacks are JC's fault, eventhough you have no evidence either, other than observation, which I too have. The difference is I have stats that suggest it's the OL, while you have jack squat. Some sacks, are certainly on Jason and Zorn's playcalling. Watch the first passing play of the season for a quick example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 Well gee, we have 38 sacks, from the previous seasons mark of 27 sacks. We have an OL that's even older, and even more injured. We have a QB who improved in every statstical category. Hmm, I wonder who's giving up sacks?Funny how you say I can't prove the sacks were the fault of the OL, though the stats certainly suggest it, yet you have no problem asserting the sacks are JC's fault, eventhough you have no evidence either, other than observation, which I too have. The difference is I have stats that suggest it's the OL, while you have jack squat. The line protections in 07 were called by Rabach. The line protections in 08 were called by JC. You can't separate blame when it comes to sacks without including the QB in Zorn's scheme. Since reading a defense is JC's best skill, it can't be his fault for calling poor protections right? If the O-line sucks so bad, how come they are so good at run blocking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.