THUNDERDOME Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 WP: DC Sports Bog: Is Jason Campbell Un-clutch? http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcs...un-clutch.html click link for entire article Is Jason Campbell Un-clutch? One good thing about the pending end of this Redskins season: it could mark the end, for all time, of the incessant Jason Campbell debates 'round these parts. "No way he's gonna be back," ESPN's John Clayton said on Mike and Mike Tuesday morning. "My guess is you're gonna see the Redskins draft a quarterback in the first round and then probably not try to resign [Campbell]. They may have to go out and get a veteran backup quarterback, but no, I think Jason Campbell's gonna be moving on." If that's the case, we have four more weeks to debate the "Is Jason Campbell Clutch?" issue. And oddly, both sides got more ammo from this week's loss to the Saints. Football Outsiders ranked Campbell the top NFL quarterback of the week, writing this: 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 [defense-adjusted yards above replacement] were the third-most in a game this year, and the best performance by anyone not named Drew Brees. So with his offensive weapons disappearing and the NFC's best team in town, that's clutch. He played great and had his team in position to win. There's no question. On the other hand, the haters--and yes, I am one--point out that yet again, when given a chance to produce an iconic last-minute game-winning drive, Campbell failed, throwing an interception. This sparked a lively debate on the Redskins Insider podcast, with me claiming this was symptomatic of Campbell's career, and Rick Maese ridiculing for me pinning this loss on Campbell after his best day as a pro. To be clear, the haters don't blame him for this loss, in any way. We just think that the Vince Youngs of the world somehow find a way to win games like that, and more often than not, the Jason Campbells don't. If you're on a team that doesn't require late-game QB heroics, that's fine and dandy. For the Redskins, it doesn't work. Anyhow, with all the vitriol on both sides, I figured we should at least make some small effort to gather a few facts. You could do this in lots of different ways; I chose to look at the 16 games in which Campbell and his offense received the ball with less than six minutes remaining, in a one-possession or tied game. I disregarded time-stopping spikes (not counting them as incompletions), and disregarded possessions that began with virtually no time remaining. In those situations, Campbell has connected on two long touchdown passes for late-game wins (Carolina in '06, New Orleans in '08). He's also led two drives for game-winning field goals in overtime, although both were primarily run-based drives (Dolphins and Jets in '07). On the bad side, he's thrown four interceptions, been sacked five times, and fumbled three times. In total, he's 44-82 for 584 yards, with those two touchdowns, those four interceptions, and a 64.3 quarterback rating. The Redskins are 4-12 in those 16 games. Now, is it Campbell's fault that the Redskins' defense crumbled against the Saints? Of course not. Is it his fault that after his rushing touchdown tied the score against the 49ers last year, the defense allowed San Francisco a game-winning field goal? No, it's not. But here's why that perception persists: the last five times he's gotten the ball in one of these late-game, tied-or-close situations, the Redskins have lost. That, to me, matters more than things like this, from a recent Tom Boswell column: There are 12 quarterbacks on the planet who are clearly better than the one the Redskins already have. Their names are Brady, Favre, Brees, Manning, Manning, Rodgers, Rivers, Warner, Roethlisberger, McNabb and, probably, Romo sits to pee and Schaub, too.... There are also about a dozen other quarterbacks in the NFL who are just about as good as Campbell, give or take a bit. Statistically, they are grouped around his passer rating of 85.3 -- quarterbacks like Kyle Orton, Joe Flacco, Carson Palmer and Matt Hasselbeck. (I haven't included the game-by-game breakdown of Campbell's late-game performances here, because it's kind of tedious, but if enough of you ask to see it, I'll come back and add them.) UPDATE: Adam Schefter discussed the Campbell Question during his chat on Tuesday: Q: How close are the Redskins from being able to compete in the NFC East again? Is a new coach really going to solve all their problems, or do they need new talent, too? A: Loving these questions that provide double answers that have validity. The Redskins are not at the level of the Cowboys, Eagles or Giants right now, but they're not far off, either. The biggest difference between the Redskins and the rest of the teams in the NFC East is the play they are getting at quarterback. Now, I don't know whether it's the coaching, the play calling or the quarterback himself -- or maybe all three -- but the production the Redskins have gotten out of Jason Campbell does not match what the Cowboys have gotten from Tony Romo sits to pee, the Eagles have gotten from Donovan McNabb and Kevin Kolb, or the Giants have gotten from Eli Manning. It's a quarterback league, and that's where the Redskins seem to be trailing right now. Special teams play hasn't exactly helped, either. If Shaun Suisham had made the kicks he should have this season, Washington's record would be two wins better. But any coach who goes in there is going to have to figure out how to get better and more consistent play out of the quarterback position -- whether it's with Campbell or someone else. Pretty telling stats. Have at it ES'ers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrifNick21 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Wow. That IS telling. And if Clayton says he's likely gone...well, JC haters, you might get your wish.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMVSkins Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 We already knew the un-clutch part no surprise any team with JC will be a .500 team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus T Firefly Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 That, to me, matters more than things like this, from a recent Tom Boswell column:There are 12 quarterbacks on the planet who are clearly better than the one the Redskins already have. Their names are Brady, Favre, Brees, Manning, Manning, Rodgers, Rivers, Warner, Roethlisberger, McNabb and, probably, Romo sits to pee and Schaub, too.... There are also about a dozen other quarterbacks in the NFL who are just about as good as Campbell, give or take a bit. Statistically, they are grouped around his passer rating of 85.3 -- quarterbacks like Kyle Orton, Joe Flacco, Carson Palmer and Matt Hasselbeck. Wow, that's some crap writing there. Statistically, there are a dozen QBs "clearly better" and another dozen "just about as good". Passer rating: 12. Eli Manning 89.2 14. Jason Campbell 87.7 25. Brady Quinn 72.6 How can one get paid to write about football and claim that, statistically, Manning is "clearly better" than Campbell, while Quinn is "just about as good"? Statistically, there are exactly 4 that are as "close" to Campbell as he is to Eli. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 It seems like the good late game TD/FG drives were when the team had its starting OL intact and doing well, and that the drives that ended in sacks and fumbles were resulting from a bad OL. I don't know the specifics for all the losses though, as they are not all listed. INTs could be on JC or could be due to lack of decent protection. However, even the Saints game, JC had relatively solid protection most of the game, and he played great overall. But late in the game they allowed defenders to get in his face more, and he threw a pick. Keep in mind JC had just hurt his ankle and was limping around trying to get it to hold up so he could keep playing. Seems like some of that grit and determination I see some claim he lacks. He's been knocked around, his ankles have been banged up half the season, and he still plays his ass off. That says a lot about the type of player some claim he is not. Yes the INT was untimely as we were nearing FG range. But how many of you can honestly say the next FG try would have been good after Suisham shanked the 23 yd chip shot? I'm not saying Campbell is 100% a clutch QB, I'm saying with a solid OL he can be, as he has usually given solid play when behind the starting OL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 I'm not saying Campbell is 100% a clutch QB... Campbell isn't even 10% a clutch QB. I think that is the heart of the matter right there. He had a great game until the very end. When the things around him fail, he's not capable of carrying the team and leading them on. A clutch QB is one who looks around at what's around him, the mistakes and shortcomings of others and just says "**** it" and carries the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Campbell isn't even 10% a clutch QB.I think that is the heart of the matter right there. He had a great game until the very end. When the things around him fail, he's not capable of carrying the team and leading them on. A clutch QB is one who looks around at what's around him, the mistakes and shortcomings of others and just says "**** it" and carries the team. Think Ben Rothliesberger...similar numbers last year right? What was the major difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciscofan Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Lesson: JC isn't going to win you any games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Think Ben Rothliesberger...similar numbers last year right? What was the major difference? bens just a way better QB? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Campbell isn't even 10% a clutch QB.I think that is the heart of the matter right there. He had a great game until the very end. When the things around him fail, he's not capable of carrying the team and leading them on. A clutch QB is one who looks around at what's around him, the mistakes and shortcomings of others and just says "**** it" and carries the team. An elite QB is able to look around him, see the mistakes and shortcomings of others, say **** it, carry the team, and succeed. A good QB does the same, and keeps on fighting through injuries to play despite a lost season, but sometimes him, and sometimes other aspects of the team, cause losses. That's what JC is IMO, and with a rebuilt OL I think it's all we need. Just an opinion though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Think Ben Rothliesberger...similar numbers last year right? What was the major difference?Good example. Ben shines late in the game when Campbell withers. Those 5 games in 2008 when BR led his team to victory in the last 3 minutes are the difference between 6-10 and 11-5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
authentic Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Tell us something that most of us didn't know already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
authentic Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Campbell isn't even 10% a clutch QB.I think that is the heart of the matter right there. He had a great game until the very end. When the things around him fail, he's not capable of carrying the team and leading them on. A clutch QB is one who looks around at what's around him, the mistakes and shortcomings of others and just says "**** it" and carries the team. All you had to do last week was look on the other side of the field to find out what a clutch QB is. Down 10 pts with 2 mins left in the game, Breese takes his team down the field to tie and then in OT leads them down for the game winning FG. See ya JC!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Think Ben Rothliesberger...similar numbers last year right? What was the major difference? The Steelers' last possession in the Super Bowl. That's the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisenberg Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 All you had to do last week was look on the other side of the field to find out what a clutch QB is. Down 10 pts with 2 mins left in the game, Breese takes his team down the field to tie and then in OT leads them down for the game winning FG. See ya JC!!! You mean down 7 points with 2 minutes left? Also, who knows what would have happened with Campbell in overtime had Sellers and/or the refs not ended the drive that looked promising - nobody could really say anything. The bottom line is if Suisham makes the chipshot we're not talking about any of this right now - that drive for the FG should have been the "clutch" drive where he made several good throws to get them right near the goalline. Coaches made the decision to run three times and then kick the chipshot - not his fault Suisham failed the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnb123 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Anyone who argues the fact that JC can't get it done when it matters is blind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Um, hello. The reason one is in a "clutch" situation is because SOMEBODY, SOMEWHERE failed and the team is forced in a position where they have to win the game. If the offensive line was perfect, the defense was perfect, the kicker was perfect, there would never be a clutch situation. If Shaun Suisham makes the kick, Jason Campbell doesn't have the opportunity to prove if he's clutch or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpskins10 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 All you had to do last week was look on the other side of the field to find out what a clutch QB is. Down 10 pts with 2 mins left in the game, Breese takes his team down the field to tie and then in OT leads them down for the game winning FG. See ya JC!!! So it's that easy? Dude, what've we been doing? We should just go find another Drew Brees. I'll get Vinny on the horn, he'll be happy we uncovered this revelation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 So it's that easy?Dude, what've we been doing? We should just go find another Drew Brees. I'll get Vinny on the horn, he'll be happy we uncovered this revelation. Of course it's not easy, but you want at least a probable chance that it can happen. According to Dan Steinberg's research, Jason Campbell has succeeded 12.5% of the time. A one in eight chance. That's horrible. And to further cement the point, Jason Campbell's stats aren't exactly great either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Whether Suisham made or missed the kick is irrelevant to the big picture. Teams need players, particularly QBs to win games sometimes. The proof is in, Campbell cannot win a game if it comes down to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Operations Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Finally some solid figures to back up us "haters". Let's see the Candle lovers spin this. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzmuda Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Whether Suisham made or missed the kick is irrelevant to the big picture. Teams need players, particularly QBs to win games sometimes. The proof is in, Campbell cannot win a game if it comes down to him. He also doesn't compare Campbell to any other QB. Instead, he does the dumb thing. Look at this number! It's low, therefore it's worse than everyone else. Or it's worse than what I imagine would be average. He even references Vince Young's comeback from a few weeks ago, but doesn't mention Young played poorly enough this week that he couldn't even give his team a chance to come from behind. It's like the old Jake Plummer argument - he was a great comeback QB - but only because he played so poorly for the first 3 and a half quarters. The question is then, can ANY QB lead THIS team from behind with regularity? I don't think so. Not with the OL and the WRs on this team. Moreover, another interpretation of those numbers, just as valid as the "unclutch" argument, is that Campbell is good enough to keep a bad team close, but isn't good enough to help a bad team win. I think that's actually more likely. Unless you want to make the argument that the Redskins are good team being held back by terrible QB play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus T Firefly Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 So it's that easy?Dude, what've we been doing? We should just go find another Drew Brees. I'll get Vinny on the horn, he'll be happy we uncovered this revelation. I think it would save a lot of bandwidth on this site if we could just get people to understand that all the posters who defend Campbell to any extent would gladly give him up for Manning, Brady, Brees or several others. Hell, if you could trade him for a QB who had a 1 in 3 shot of being one of those guys, I'm sure most of us would take that roll of the dice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 The question is then, can ANY QB lead THIS team from behind with regularity? I don't think so. Not with the OL and the WRs on this team.Come on, ANY QB???? ANY QB???? If Campbell has had 16 shots to lead the team to victory then that tells me that they are playing competitive football. A quick look at the results this season tells me the Skins are playing competitive football. They just played the best team in football to a 2 minute battle of QBs. The Skins just need THEIR QB to do his job late in the game once in a while and turn some of these losses into wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskinsgod Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 One thing that jumps out about the whole article is when it says "its a qb league"!!! Those who love JC and make all kinds of excuses for why he's not playing well, just don't get it. Its all about the QB in the NFL today. If your QB can't finish a last minute drive in the NFL, you better find one who can because teams today are so close in talent that most games are going to be won or lost in the last few minutes and it will all come down to your QB's ability to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.