arkowi Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Saw this on Mister Irrelevant, interesting article: "His pick on the Redskins' penultimate drive was an awful, ill-advised throw, the sort of bad decision he usually avoids with a checkdown or a sack, but Campbell otherwise had his best day as a pro by shredding the league's best pass defense. His 275 passing DYAR were the third-most in a game this year, and the best performance by anyone not named Drew Brees. Our numbers overestimate his level of performance because they don't consider the injuries that were affecting the Saints' secondary, but the Saints were about as injured one week ago, and Campbell's numbers blew away Tom Brady's." http://www.footballoutsiders.com/quick-reads/2009/week-13-quick-reads Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B&G808 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Except for when it counted! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkowi Posted December 9, 2009 Author Share Posted December 9, 2009 Except for when it counted! Unfortunately, you are correct. Still, some compelling numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Our numbers overestimate his level of performance because they don't consider the injuries that were affecting the Saints' secondary.. The numbers don't consider the injuries that hit the offense either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drastik Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 The writer takes note of the couple of guys injured for the Saints secondary... But fails to mention the 6 guys on IR for the Redskins offense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMVSkins Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 So whats JC's average for having a "Career Game" 1 out of every 16 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrifNick21 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Except for when it counted! Oh joy! Gotta love it when people find the negative in an already bad season! LOVE your enthusiasm. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B&G808 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Unfortunately, you are correct. Still, some compelling numbers. I gotta say that was the best I have seen JC play. The distribution to the WR's and the platooning of the RB's was very effective. Definetly an improvement with SL calling the play's. I would just once like to have that feeling with a minute left, " no worries JC will get it done!" With that being said, I'm a Colt Brennan guy. However, if JC can continue to improve and somehow get that game winning touch, dare I say keep him one more year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 I think that people who blame Campbell don't give him enough credit, even with the pick. The pick didn't end the game. The Redskins had the ball in overtime and Sellers turned it over, not Campbell. That was completely out of Campbell's control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B&G808 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Oh joy! Gotta love it when people find the negative in an already bad season! LOVE your enthusiasm. :doh: You spoke too soon!:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Football Outsiders DYAR formula is what they are defending. They sell their stats to other outlets including ESPN. They also had an article about JC last year or the year before that he will be a statistical anomaly using their system if he doesn't succeed. Their analysis of Campbell seems very slanted to me and I think their large financial incentive to have their statistical formula product perceived as relevant factors into it. If you create a product and claim that it is far superior than the NFL's QB rating formula and the only one that accurately provides a metric for the contribution of individual players, it is a huge blow when that product does not accurately apply to a QB that performs well under it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrifNick21 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 And what exactly does "DYAR" stand for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkowi Posted December 9, 2009 Author Share Posted December 9, 2009 So whats JC's average for having a "Career Game" 1 out of every 16 games. So there are QBs out there that have a career game every week? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 everyone is aware that campbell had a great game. the question is, can he do this regularly. after 47 starts, the answer is a blatant NO. even bruce gradkowski had a sick game last week, nobody thinks hes very good. bad players sometimes have great games, it happens in every sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 And what exactly does "DYAR" stand for? http://footballoutsiders.com/info/methods#dyar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheItalianStallion Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 The numbers don't consider the injuries that hit the offense either.Including Campbell's ankle injury just shortly before the INT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 everyone is aware that campbell had a great game. the question is, can he do this regularly. after 47 starts, the answer is a blatant NO. even bruce gradkowski had a sick game last week, nobody thinks hes very good.bad players sometimes have great games, it happens in every sport. Valid point! However, he's had three games that are getting increasingly better. Let's just see. Some of us don't want a new quarterback for 2010, anyway, since we're not making a playoff run anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkowi Posted December 9, 2009 Author Share Posted December 9, 2009 everyone is aware that campbell had a great game. the question is, can he do this regularly. after 47 starts, the answer is a blatant NO. even bruce gradkowski had a sick game last week, nobody thinks hes very good.bad players sometimes have great games, it happens in every sport. It's true, as the old saying goes, a broken clock is right twice a day. However, the last few weeks, Campbell does seem to be steadily improving. Had a solid outing vs. denver and vs. Phi and Dal he was like 8 for 12 on third downs in one game, and 12 for 12 on third downs in the other. Coming off those three performances to have a career day shows improvement. He will either keep it up, or he won't. That is why they play the games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Their analysis of Campbell seems very slanted to me . unlike your posts slamming campbell. interesting. a company like FO who compile stats meticulously- is slanted. so much so that they have some bizarre interest in convincing everyone that JC will be a good QB. but your dislike of JC is based on....what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 It's true, as the old saying goes, a broken clock is right twice a day.However, the last few weeks, Campbell does seem to be steadily improving. Had a solid outing vs. denver and vs. Phi and Dal he was like 8 for 12 on third downs in one game, and 12 for 12 on third downs in the other. Coming off those three performances to have a career day shows improvement. He will either keep it up, or he won't. That is why they play the games. his cowboys game was not very good IMO. being 12-12 on 3rd down where the good majority were passes short of the marker (which is his usual play on 3rd down) with great plays by receivers isnt something to get excited about. the results of those short passes were just different on that one day, again, more of a fluke than a trend for him. and his denver performance was pretty meh as well. the eagles game was not very good, he had two horrible picks which handed the eagles easy points, and his inability to lead us in the 4th quarter was costly. and the saints game he played awesome, but ill continue saying it, when we needed him the most he folded with that pick. this isnt the production that should be expected from a 28 year old 1st round QB. plenty of QBs can put up the numbers campbell is putting up if given enough starts. 15 TDs, 12 INTs, and a 3-9 record just isnt cutting it and warrants no reason to give him yet another season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustangSteve Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 So there are QBs out there that have a career game every week? No, they just make a 300 yard game look average and have more then 1 a season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Football Outsiders DYAR formula is what they are defending. They sell their stats to other outlets including ESPN. They also had an article about JC last year or the year before that he will be a statistical anomaly using their system if he doesn't succeed. I'm a regular visitor at that site. I don't remember the article and I'm trying to figure out what you mean. The NFL's QB rating measures performance. It doesn't predict success or failure. As I understand it, DYAR does the same. So, why would FO be concerned about Jason's success? Their analysis of Campbell seems very slanted to me and I think their large financial incentive to have their statistical formula product perceived as relevant factors into it. If you create a product and claim that it is far superior than the NFL's QB rating formula and the only one that accurately provides a metric for the contribution of individual players, it is a huge blow when that product does not accurately apply to a QB that performs well under it. How would one question the accuracy without a better tool for measuring performance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B&G808 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Valid point!However, he's had three games that are getting increasingly better. Let's just see. Some of us don't want a new quarterback for 2010, anyway, since we're not making a playoff run anyway. Agreed! he has improved drastically since SL was installed. Having a great game for 58:00 minutes is awesome! SS's miss cost them the game. JC had plenty of time to drive the length of the field, he threw a pic. QB's need to live for those situations. For those of us that saw Terry Bradshaw and Roger Staubach( the originator of the 2:00 minute drill), those guys would be mediocre for 58:00. But be down by 10 PTS with the game on the line and Superman would appear. JC need's to find that within himself to win over the fanbase like BLC and SCS. Until that happens it will be a great game that ended in disaster! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 unlike your posts slamming campbell.interesting. a company like FO who compile stats meticulously- is slanted. so much so that they have some bizarre interest in convincing everyone that JC will be a good QB. but your dislike of JC is based on....what? i cant speak for him, but im assuming his dislike is based on his knack for failing to produce a winning record for the washington redskins. 2-5 in 06 5-7 in 07 8-8 in 08 3-9 in 09 how that warrants anymore playing time is beyond me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timmy Smith Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 It usually takes 3 years for an offense to truly jell and learn the nuances of the WCO - this is well-known. What we're seeing with Campbell and the Skins these days is that they're finally beginning to get it, and the lightbulb is finally beginning to go off. Sadly, all of this is happening as Snyder's patience has worn thin, and it looks like Zorn is gone after this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.