FightingIrishman Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 That might be the case....we shall see how both of them perform next year. But I still wouldn't support getting a QB that will cost us our future or the ability to fill another need. Just one more year with JC will answer a lot of questions. I can agree with that. I just hate to suffer JC under center "one more year." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jthor99 Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 I don't care if Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees were behind center during the last 8 games. If the line blocks like they did in the last 8 games there isn't 1 QB in this entire league who would succeed. It all goes hand in hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandman69 Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 Rookie QBs get picked all the time and don't start right away. Most don't. I hope that Jason didn't really say he wanted to be traded if we picked Sanchez. It doesn't seem like him, IMO. I hope there is an open competition. Hell there should be for every position. Put up or shut up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhouse Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 I can agree with that. I just hate to suffer JC under center "one more year." Rather that than suffering two years from now because we can't put a hand on the opponents QB, or can't get turnovers on defense or can't protect "our franchise QB" etc etc. Powerhouses are built, not acquired through FA/trades in the offseason. Plus JC under center with the same system for the second year in a row might not be as painful as you think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usapatriot Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 My only issue with that statement is if someone else would of been brought in like Cutler, or Sanchez there wouldn't be a competition.If the club is going to give up value in order to aquire someone then how is the "fight" possibly fair? If Cutler or Sanchez were to have been brought in there wouldn't be a compeition. It simply would of been their job If Cutler had been brought in there wouldn't have been a competition because he has already proven himself. I know the numbers are similar but he had to carry that team and do everything pretty much himself. Thier RBs were dropping like flies. The D stunk so they had to score pretty much every drive or they were going to lose. And according to Danny there would be a competition of Sanchez came in. We'll never know now but that is what was said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter_R Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 I don't care if Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees were behind center during the last 8 games. If the line blocks like they did in the last 8 games there isn't 1 QB in this entire league who would succeed. It all goes hand in hand. Caption: I was sacked 8 more times than Jason Campbell. Caption: I made the same broken down line look good after Cambpell was injured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhodus333 Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 It really wouldn't have been all within his power. You don't bring in a rookie to have him languish on the bench for years. Isn't this exactly what the Skins did after drafting Campbell in the 1st? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KokoMike Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 If Campbell can change one thing, he can change everything, and that is his mindset. Probably the most difficult thing to change under pressure. The mindset change is to move from trying to avoid mistakes to trying to make plays. If he does that, everything will fall into place for the Redskins and him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter_R Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 Isn't this exactly what the Skins did after drafting Campbell in the 1st? How about Aaron Rodgers while we're at it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 Jurgensen would know a thing or two about QB competition. Allen loved manipulating his QBs by creating a QB controversy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IbleedBnG83 Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 Great point. I think JC has handled it great. I would like to see more fire out of him. Hopefully this fuels his fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 Roethlisberger had a poor offensive line, but he is even bigger than Campbell and can take more of a beating. Plus, he holds on to the ball longer than almost any other QB in the league, he is going to take more sacks no matter what his OL does. And quoting sack numbers is misleading for several reasons. First, JC is a mobile QB and takes less sacks than a lot of other QBs would. But this doesn't change the pressures from opposing front 7s he is facing nearly every time he passes from behind center. Second, JC has only Moss as a viable receiving threat aside from Cooley. His forte is getting open down field which takes time to develop. It isn't like Brady who can rely on Welker in the slot to be open within two seconds of the snap. Our offense either needs a more diverse set of targets, or more time for the play to develop before Campbell has to throw the ball. Third, (and most important), our offensive line actually played very well for seven to eight games last year. And guess what, we won seven of those games. Care to guess which part of the season they happened in? After the midseason point, our offensive line declined markedly and Campbell easily took a majority of his sacks following that point. If you compare the rate at which he was getting sacked to other QBs who took a bunch, you see that our final 8 game stretch saw just as poor protection as anyone else's. Consequently, that's also when we lost most of our games. Roethlisberger didn't have a great individual season last year like he did the season before. But his team was phenomenal and his defense was one of the best the league has seen this decade. He is more clutch than consistent. He lets everything fall into place until the final stretch of the game where he can take over games. We shouldn't try and compare our QB's situation to his, because they are completely different players in completely different offenses. There isn't a single other QB in the league like Roethlisberger, and I'm not entirely sure that he would do all that well on our team with our WCO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhodus333 Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 My honest opinion? I think that with the amount of talent we have at all the other positions on our offense this year, either Campbell OR Colt could be successful. However, I feel like Brennan offers more potential for developing a high scoring offense, making us a more COMPLETE team, while Campbell merely manages the game and rely's on the defense to win. Yes, there have been successful teams that have game managing QB's, but that shouldn't be what we strive for. Campbell is "good enough" to win with, but we shouldn't have "good enough" as our final goal. Every single game last year was SO CLOSE and we needed to rely on the defense because our offense was never able to open up a lead. I know that this isn't soley the QB's responsibility, but Colt seems much more willing and accurate in his ability to get the ball where it needs to go. More importantly, he seems better at getting points on the board. To me this means the potential to offensively dominate teams, open up a multi-touchdown lead, and not being left biting our nails off in the final 2 minutes of the game for a change. Campbell to me is the ideal back up QB for this team because you can survive a game by plugging him in and relying on your defense. However, I don't view him as a threat guy, and I don't think other teams see him that way either. You shouldn't make your gameplan "let the defense carry us". Aside from not losing games, the Starter needs to have the ability to come out, light it up and have the potential to get the ball to his playmakers and dominate another team offensively. We should have Campbell be our back up because he is "good enough" for our team to win with. But make Brennan the starter because he has a higher ceiling, shows a better ability to score points (the whole point of leading the offense), seems to be better liked by the fans, is more exciting to watch, and is known for his accuracy (which means a better ability to get it in the hands of the other playmakers on the team. Our Qb shouldn't just get our playmakers the ball, he should also BE a playmaker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbowman Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 If Campbell was riding the bench, it is because he wasn't as good as he thought he is. To be honest, even if we had drafted Sanchez, it was still Campbell's job to lose. He's the incumbant with a good deal of NFL experience. If he can't beat out a rookie, he doesn't deserve the job.Course, we don't even know if he was going to ask for a trade. All we have is a rumor which Campbell isn't confirming. Our team is run by a fan with the team checkbook, yes, the best QB could very easily sit so the guy the owner likes plays. This is a fact of life with Snyder owning the team. It's how we end up with the Bruce Smith's, Deion Sanders, Jason Taylors, and other washed up has beens instead of young talent. It's how if we got Sanchez, he'd start with his 16 games of college experience for Campbell, probably ruining his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Bob Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 http://www.hogshaven.com/2009/4/28/856976/doc-walker-interviews-sonny-dont HH has highlights and a recording of the interview with Doc and Sonny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Brown #43 Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 But' date=' the kicker today is the business side. [/quote'] Ding. Folks, Matthew Stafford now earns roughly twice as much money as Tom Brady or Peyton Manning. The Lions can't afford NOT to play the guy. As much as I love Sonny, this wasn't the economic reality when he played. So in this case, it's an antiquated notion to talk about "welcoming the competition." Similarly, if we had drafted Sanchez, we'd have traded a LOT to get him, and we'd also be paying him a truckload of money. This notion that we would have drafted Sanchez, and then just never played him if JC played well enough to earn a new contract, is extremely unlikely. When you draft Sanchez that early, you're making a serious commitment to him. To just say, "oh, JC should welcome the competition" is ridiculous, given the economic reality of the situation. JC's entering the last year of his contract. His job would have been to keep the seat warm for Sanchez to take over in 2010. "Welcoming the competition" is fine if the contract situations of the two players are similar. That's not the case here. Now, I'm not suggesting that JC has done enough to have any kind of job security here. But I will say that it's absurd to say he should be excited about the competition, when the contract situations of the two parties are so completely different. It's like tying a boxer's hands behind his back and then telling him he should "welcome" the opportunity to get in the ring and fight his next opponent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenegadeTK Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 definitely agree. man.... not being in the DMV area anymore, sonny is one of the faces/voices i miss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 But I liked Sonnys thoughts on that, that Campbell shouldn't let it get to him and just come in this season and shut everybody up. And Im definitely one that thinks Campbell will on fire this season.Billy Kilmer agrees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 I don't buy it. According to others, Sonny said that Campbell sucks. Sonny's the biggest Redskins fan out there, so why would he tell Campbell to tough it out? Unless ESers don't know what the hell they're talking about. And, for the Collins comparison, drop it. It's just stupid, and if you can't get that, well, then if the shoe fits . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 Caption: I was sacked 8 more times than Jason Campbell. ...and I was pretty damn mediocre because of it. It is amazing how much a great defense can bail me out. Caption: I made the same broken down line look good after Cambpell was injured. ...until I got to the playoffs when opposing teams finally got a book on me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter_R Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 And, for the Collins comparison, drop it. It's just stupid, and if you can't get that, well, then if the shoe fits . . . And why is that? Because he makes Campbell look bad? Is it the amount of time he sat on the bench? Does it matter? He performed better. Anybody with eyes can tell you that. If the shoe fits, my ass. ...and I was pretty damn mediocre because of it. It is amazing how much a great defense can bail me out....until I got to the playoffs when opposing teams finally got a book on me. Mediocre? That's doing a disservice to Big Ben. Besides, if he's mediocre, what's that make Campbell? I wouldn't say opposing defenses got the book on Collins. For starters, the Seahawks were unbeaten (maybe 1 time) at home that season. It's a tough place to play in, and they managed to tag on 22 points in the 4th quarter, after a Redskins comeback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FightingIrishman Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 Rather that than suffering two years from now because we can't put a hand on the opponents QB, or can't get turnovers on defense or can't protect "our franchise QB" etc etc. Powerhouses are built, not acquired through FA/trades in the offseason. Plus JC under center with the same system for the second year in a row might not be as painful as you think COMPLETELY disagree on this. Check out his Scouting Reports out of college. He is STILL working on those exact same FUNDAMENTALS. Zorn says, "Inconsistent. Problems at the top of the snap, seeing the field, working through progressions and hitting his target in stride. He misses too many open receivers. Is he a franchise QB? Maybe, maybe not." Glowing crazy endorsement. Everyone else sees this kid is just not NFL quality except a few on this board. The coach is unsure, the FO tried to trade him multiple times, no other team wants him...... Jason is a lame NFL duck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 And why is that? Because he makes Campbell look bad? Is it the amount of time he sat on the bench? Does it matter? He performed better. Anybody with eyes can tell you that. If the shoe fits, my ass.Mediocre? That's doing a disservice to Big Ben. Besides, if he's mediocre, what's that make Campbell? I wouldn't say opposing defenses got the book on Collins. For starters, the Seahawks were unbeaten (maybe 1 time) at home that season. It's a tough place to play in, and they managed to tag on 22 points in the 4th quarter, after a Redskins comeback. So no excuses for Campbell but plenty of excuses for Collins in the same post. Really helping yourself out there credibility wise. Regardless, if we have to, again, bring up the fact that Collins was in the same system for ten years and the fact that coaches aren't convinced that Collins is even good enough to be the backup next year, which means that he's NOT that good, then go ahead and chase your tail. Again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 COMPLETELY disagree on this. Check out his Scouting Reports out of college. He is STILL working on those exact same FUNDAMENTALS.Zorn says, "Inconsistent. Problems at the top of the snap, seeing the field, working through progressions and hitting his target in stride. He misses to many open receivers. Is he a franchise QB? Maybe, maybe not." Glowing crazy endorsement. Everyone else sees this kid is just not NFL quality except a few on this board. The coach is unsure, the FO trade to trade him multiple times, no other team wants him...... Jason is a lame NFL duck. I don't get it. This is the same Jim Zorn who didn't feel the need to push to upgrade right tackle. So he's right about Campbell, therefore he must be right about us being set with the beached whale, the senior citizen, or Heyer? Nice! Our team is money. 19-0, here we come! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FightingIrishman Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 I don't get it. This is the same Jim Zorn who didn't feel the need to push to upgrade right tackle. So he's right about Campbell, therefore he must be right about us being set with the beached whale, the senior citizen, or Heyer? Nice! Our team is money. 19-0, here we come! M8, with all due respect.... the O-Line is NOT our problem... it is JASON CAMPBELL. You apologists continue to accept mediocrity. EDIT: And Jim Zorn knows a hella lot more about football than anyone here... thats fer sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.