What QB could perform behind that lousy OL!!!!`

[THE HAMMER'IN HOG]

Peyton Manning would look ordinary behind our current O-line.

And JC would look less than ordinary behind his.

[redskinsgod]

Why is the score but not the better stats the benchmark for Collins in the KC game but the stats and not the two scores the benchmark for Campbell in the Giants game???? It's impossible to take anyone seriously who has double standards and changes them to fit their agenda.

I wouldn't argue with rocketcity about campbell. He's like an attorney, he picks and chooses what he wants to believe in. We argued earlier and the argument became so childish I gave up.

[redskinsgod]

Hang on that crutch if you want to. I'll be happy if we start Collins the next two games, and see if he can be a better placeholder than THE 5 YEAR FAILURE THAT SNUFFS OUT UNDER PRESSURE, for the Redskins' sake.

Now you're being obtuse. Collins really did outplay Candle in KC. I thought in spite of the stats (which happens from time to time, Big Ben sometimes leads his team to victory despite terrible stats. And turns out I was wrong about the stats. Collins had the better rating in KC. 60.1 to 46.1.

And in both the KC and Gnats games, it was a stagnant offense under Candle, then Collins came in and the offense picked up.

But no you want to argue things as if you didn't watch either game. like this gem:

In the NYG game, Campbell had worse stats, but led scoring drives that Collins couldn't. That is the true barometer I think you have to go by as a Skins fan

I shouldn't have to tell you we didn't catch fire offensively till Collins came in. That the one time Collins was in we had a chance to score, as opposed to most of Candle's drives. Making your statement totally false and a simple matter of childish semantics. Like saying "we almost matched NY scoring in the 3rd quarter so we could have played to nearly a tie that game" :silly:But as long as you're more interested in parroting statements clueslessly, the facts elude you.

Anyone who still supports campbell doesn't watch any of the games. If they did, they wouldn't be proudly telling us all how great he is. Its obvious who the better QB was last night, and over the last 2 years, but trying to get the JC lovers to admit it is like pulling teeth.

[redskinsgod]

Part of me thinks Gibbs would have stuck with Todd in 2008 had he stuck around for the final year of his deal.

And he deserved it, too. After his performance in 2007 he earned the right to keep playing. Only problem there, it just would have prolonged the Jason Campbell experiment:hysterical:

I agree. I think we really had something going with collins after the 07 season. There is no doubt in my mind Gibbs would have sat campbell and started collins but we'll never know will we? Campbell should have spent a few years learning behind collins, it might have helped his progression and Gruden mentioned the same thing the other night. Its obvious, campbell was not ready to be an NFL starting QB.

[nneece]

No debate. No QB is going to thrive behind the O-Line on Monday night. JC dropped straight back and had players coming at him unabated. Todd Collins did make some nice throws inc. the one to SM, but only a matter of time before he ends up like JC, or worse. Bleary eyed is the only way to describe a QB playing behind this pathetic O-line.

[fullnelson9999]

No debate. No QB is going to thrive behind the O-Line on Monday night. JC dropped straight back and had players coming at him unabated. Todd Collins did make some nice throws inc. the one to SM, but only a matter of time before he ends up like JC, or worse. Bleary eyed is the only way to describe a QB playing behind this pathetic O-line.

Thats true. I remember TC coming in against Kansas City and having a few good plays in the beginning, but ultimately accomplishing nothing.

[darrelgreenie]

3 quarterbacks have been sacked more times than campbell this year (cassel, roethlisberger, and rodgers)....roethlisberger and rodgers both have over 3800 yards passing, 22 or more TDs, and QB ratings greater than 100....and, most importantly, their teams in the playoff hunt (although the steelers are barely hanging on)...............................Roethlisberger was the most sacked QB in the league...

so....i guess the answer is, at the very least, Ben Roethlisberger and Aaron Rodgers could

Well when you are comparing the stats of these QBs you have to consider how much time they have in their respective systems.

I'll give you that Ben and Rodger's are better QBs then Jason Campbell; the more time a QB has in a system the more command or mastery they have over that offense (not to mention that the Packers are loaded with receiving weapons and the Steelers are ahead of us as well.

Secondly, and more importantly all sacks are not created equal.

Getting hit and sacked on 3 step and 5 step drops like JC.

Isn't the same as getting hit or sacked on 5 and 7 step drops after holding the ball.

And both Ben and Rodgers are notorious for holding the ball too long, yes longer then JC.

Just watch these dudes play, Ben regularly doesn't make initial read progression holds the ball then scrambles around.

Rodgers is often looking downfield 1st then looks to get ride of the ball.

Ben and Rodgers are bad examples to compare the sack totals because their sacks come after they had good protection not because of poor protection.

[Smoot Point Really]

It's all relative... We can't really answer the question since only one QB actually has to play behind that OL. I believe there are a number of QBs who could perform better than JC, but no tangible evidence outside of the small sampling of plays that Collins has been involved in. A few items to note: Collins immediately tried to stretch the field and dictate to the defense how they should play. JC is the type of QB who needs everything around him to be perfect in order to thrive. He isn't the type who elevates the play of those around him, but needs others to elevate his own game. I think Carolina is a good fit for JC. I just hope we get a pick or two for him.

[Smoot Point Really]

The fact that JC wasn't able to challenge the Giants downfield and Collins had two very nice long passes in 4 attempts tells me that Jason could've done more to help the offensive line than he did. The line was horrible, but if you can only throw screens and short passes to the flat, the defense will pin their ears back and come after you. The defense was the worst part of the game, but the offense was painful to watch also.

[Shilsu]

Shilsu - Congratulations! You're one of the very few ES posters who have multiple bans and user notes numbering in the double digits and still have an active account. That is a feat very few members have been able to achieve.

Enjoy your time here because I can assure you your days are numbered - unless you dramatically change your attitude on how you address your fellow members.

Dude, you are soooo lucky that at the last moment I saw MTH said something to you first, because I was sending you off for a lonnnng time.

Hey, wait a minute. I thought according to a few other posters, I had some sort of clout with you guys that made me untouchable. What happened? Did my checks bounce?

[Shilsu]

This is why I think that the ardent defenders/haters are both ridiculous.

You can't base things off of one throw just like you can't base them off of four.

However, for both sides, you can't have it both ways.

The Campbell defenders can't throw out that one pick and throw out Collins's four passes.

The Campbell haters can't base their judgments on Campbell's one pick (you have a couple more to pick from, anyway) or say that Collins was better on four throws.

Both sides go to a ridiculous extreme.

And Shilsu, I just quoted you as to not quote the entire thread. This wasn't aimed specifically at you.

No, this is why the ardent defenders (which you are a part of) are ridiculous. Who based things off of the QB Rating? It wasn't me. It was hobbie8046. Not me. He is the one who made a long-winded post about how the Kansas City game was "the true barometer" of Todd Collins' ability and thus was proof that he doesn't deserve any benefit of the doubt over Jason Campbell based on QB Rating.

Then he realized he got the numbers wrong and backpedaled as quickly as he could, deleting his post, and then coming to the conclusion that QB Rating is "not a very solid foundation to build one's argument" when that's exactly what he tried to do before he realized he got the numbers wrong. You think if Todd Collins actually had the lower QB Rating he'd go back and retract everything he said in similar fashion?

Meanwhile, last week you went on a tirade about how you were living in the "real world" and how you were going to "continue" to watch Campbell play "exceptionally". Not the past four games (which is also an opinion subject to be criticized considering the Dallas and Philly showings were not that great), but in the immediate and near future. Are you going to hold yourself accountable for this by bumping up the Mayock/Campbell thread which has nothing to do with the Giants game, just like it had nothing to do with the Raiders game, declaring one side to "shut the **** up"?

Of course not. Please don't pretend to be some sort of rational, realistic beacon of compromise because you are not.

The ardent defenders make some of the most outlandish claims that can be proven to be FACTUALLY wrong or are completely implausible based on LOGIC and the proper use of statistical evidence. How many more ridiculous claims are we going to have to hear...

That Drew Brees would never succeed in a run-based offense (proven false), that he needs 40 or more attempts per game to succeed (proven false), and that is why you rather have Jason Campbell then Brees? That Todd Collins' run in 2007 is overrated because the team got healthy at the precise time in the middle of a game that Jason Campbell got injured, and that is also when Sean Taylor's spirit overcame everyone? That Todd Collins is worse than Jason Campbell because he had a worse QB rating in the Kansas City game (proven false)? That it's not Jason Campbell's fault for failing on the final drive because the rest of the team put it on his shoulders to win the game and that's unfair?

And this branches off into discussions of other football players and teams where people continue to make uneducated statements that likewise can be proven FACTUALLY false or improbable based on LOGIC. Whether it be Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Aaron Rodgers, and so on.

The common denominator that is prevalent through some of the worst football analysis on this board is that... They usually come from those that unabashedly support Jason Campbell. And then when they say something completely stupid, they pat each other on the back and make posts saying, "How dare you use logic and reason!" when it's anything but.

[NewCliche21]

I'm not an ardent defender. You're making yourself look crazy, again.

Your obsession is horrifying. Even when I say that it's not aimed at you specifically, you still think that the world revolves around you.

The rest of your post doesn't deserve a response, and to be honest, I can't wait until another one of your checks bounce. All that you do is go off on other members and try to stroke your own ego by being HAPPY when the team does poorly, combine arguments with other posters to arguments with me, call other posters names and be downright disrespectful nearly every time you hit the "submit" button.

Do you know football? Sure. Do you know how to be social? Stick to football.

[Shilsu]

I'm not an ardent defender. You're making yourself look crazy, again.

Your obsession is horrifying. Even when I say that it's not aimed at you specifically, you still think that the world revolves around you.

The rest of your post doesn't deserve a response, and to be honest, I can't wait until another one of your checks bounce. All that you do is go off on other members and try to stroke your own ego by being HAPPY when the team does poorly, combine arguments with other posters to arguments with me, call other posters names and be downright disrespectful nearly every time you hit the "submit" button.

Do you know football? Sure. Do you know how to be social? Stick to football.

Should I tone down the insults? I think the answer is obvious.

Should I respect other posters? Only if they deserve it. Here's a clear example of why I don't respect you at all. You are completely oblivious.

You are the one who decided to hop right in and declare both sides wrong despite the fact that it's obvious that only one side was erroneous.

Last week, you declared that I was unable to see anything positive about Jason Campbell's game besides the fact that I said in the very same thread that Campbell did well versus the Raiders. Despite the fact the week earlier, I said it was not Campbell's fault they lost to the Saints even though he choked.

And now you are accusing me of being "HAPPY" when the team does poorly, which you have no proof of, while there is plenty for the opposite argument that I am actually ANGRY when the team does poorly.

Meanwhile, it's obvious which side you align yourself with when you bump up the Mayock thread with posts like these:

"Hope the Campbell-haters can shut the **** up this week."

"If people want to look like idiots, then let them. Call them out on it every single time in public so that they can be held accountable for their foolishness. It goes both ways, but the anti-Campbell zealots just do it so much worse than you guys in the Campbell Camp!"

"I'll have fun here in the real world watching Jason Campbell continue to play exceptionally."

It's okay to support Campbell (using facts and logic). But it's not okay to pretend to be some sort of unbiased third party when you are obviously not. That just makes you a fraud.

[NewCliche21]

Should I tone down the insults? I think the answer is obvious.

Should I respect other posters? Only if they deserve it. Here's a clear example of why I don't respect you at all. You are completely oblivious.

You are the one who decided to hop right in and declare both sides wrong despite the fact that it's obvious that only one side was erroneous.

Last week, you declared that I was unable to see anything positive about Jason Campbell's game besides the fact that I said in the very same thread that Campbell did well versus the Raiders. Despite the fact the week earlier, I said it was not Campbell's fault they lost to the Saints even though he choked.

And now you are accusing me of being "HAPPY" when the team does poorly, which you have no proof of, while there is plenty for the opposite argument that I am actually ANGRY when the team does poorly.

Meanwhile, it's obvious which side you align yourself with when you bump up the Mayock thread with posts like these:

"Hope the Campbell-haters can shut the **** up this week." after the Raiders game, but don't have anything to bump it up with for this week.

"If people want to look like idiots, then let them. Call them out on it every single time in public so that they can be held accountable for their foolishness. It goes both ways, but the anti-Campbell zealots just do it so much worse than you guys in the Campbell Camp!"

"I'll have fun here in the real world watching Jason Campbell continue to play exceptionally."

It's okay to support Campbell (using facts and logic). But it's not okay to pretend to be some sort of unbiased third party when you are obviously not. That just makes you a fraud.

It's a message board. Be respectful.

And yes, I said all of those things, and I should definitely be held accountable for them. Want to put into context when they were said? When Campbell was playing well.

Did he play well Monday night? No. Facts and logic tell you that as the situations change, observations should change as well. There's no logic in your arguments, only blind rage, as there is with a LOT of people on that side of the argument. Go look at my posts two months ago and see if I wanted him here next year. No. Why? Because he was playing horribly.

You can't have it both ways, and even when Campbell plays well, you and your cohorts have cookie-cutter responses waiting.

Here's the deal on Campbell: I think that he's a B-/C+ quarterback who could do pretty well, but he's not Manning. However, I *HATE* the posts that you and your friends post, and that makes me defend him all of the time. I *HATE* your posts like I *HATE* the Cult's posts. Your horrible attitudes, your stubbornness, and your lack of will to listen to ANYTHING that anyone else says without a convoluted, cherry-picked, and backwards argument all under the guise of "logic and facts" is what makes me defend Campbell, not Campbell himself. By arguing the way that you do, you guys hurt your own argument.

If you used logic and facts like you claim to, then people wouldn't be as disgusted with your posts as they are, and you wouldn't have apparently had multiple bans and user notes.

Zealots and lovers are both wrong. If you always love a player and always defend him, then he should have a 150+ QB rating every game. If you always hate him and always bash him, then he'd better have below a 40 QB rating. If neither of those are true, then he's doing things well and poorly. It happens. Attacking him and other posters, though, makes the aforementioned posters look like total pricks who were just given a keyboard because nobody wanted to talk to them in real life.

[Shilsu]

It's a message board. Be respectful.

And yes, I said all of those things, and I should definitely be held accountable for them. Want to put into context when they were said? When Campbell was playing well.

Did he play well Monday night? No. Facts and logic tell you that as the situations change, observations should change as well. There's no logic in your arguments, only blind rage, as there is with a LOT of people on that side of the argument. Go look at my posts two months ago and see if I wanted him here next year. No. Why? Because he was playing horribly.

You can't have it both ways, and even when Campbell plays well, you and your cohorts have cookie-cutter responses waiting.

Here's the deal on Campbell: I think that he's a B-/C+ quarterback who could do pretty well, but he's not Manning. However, I *HATE* the posts that you and your friends post, and that makes me defend him all of the time. I *HATE* your posts like I *HATE* the Cult's posts. Your horrible attitudes, your stubbornness, and your lack of will to listen to ANYTHING that anyone else says without a convoluted, cherry-picked, and backwards argument all under the guise of "logic and facts" is what makes me defend Campbell, not Campbell himself. By arguing the way that you do, you guys hurt your own argument.

If you used logic and facts like you claim to, then people wouldn't be as disgusted with your posts as they are, and you wouldn't have apparently had multiple bans and user notes.

Zealots and lovers are both wrong. If you always love a player and always defend him, then he should have a 150+ QB rating every game. If you always hate him and always bash him, then he'd better have below a 40 QB rating. If neither of those are true, then he's doing things well and poorly. It happens. Attacking him and other posters, though, makes the aforementioned posters look like total pricks who were just given a keyboard because nobody wanted to talk to them in real life.

Yet more reasons why you deserve no respect.

1. If he did not play well Monday night, why don't you bump some threads and tell the "Campbell lovers" to "shut the **** up"?

2. Post proof that I had cookie-cutter responses for the Saints and Raiders games. The closest you can come up with is that I said Campbell is unclutch, and even then I did not blame him for the Saints game. Yet another blind accusation.

3. You don't base your analysis on your opinion of people unrelated to the subject matter. That's called bias, which you have just admitted whether you realize it or not, and that is exactly why your posts have little credibility.

4. Here's another reason why your posts have little credibility. You don't "love/hate" a player on a game-to-game basis. You don't "love" Bruce Gradkowski when he has a 3 TD game, and you don't "hate" Peyton Manning when he has a 3 INT game. That's like buying a stock only when it's high, and selling a stock only when it's low.

5. You have a problem with me hiding "under the guise" of logic and facts, can you point to anything factually wrong? Meanwhile, I can point to multiple instances in THIS thread from YOU and your "cohorts".

6. You don't ever back up anything you say. You claimed that I'm "HAPPY" when the Redskins lose. Why don't you please back that statement up before continuing to throw out even more slanderous accusations?

[NewCliche21]

Ignoring the point and ultra-defensive as always.

[Shilsu]

Ignoring the point and ultra-defensive as always.

Here's a step-by-step guide for you.

1. hobbie posted that Todd Collins was a worse QB than Jason Campbell due to his QB rating versus Kansas City.

2. I said Todd Collins actually had a higher QB rating.

3. hobbie deletes his post and claims QB rating means nothing because of one pass.

4. I laugh at hobbie's self-contradiction.

5. You jump in and claim both sides are wrong for trying to use one pass which affects the QB rating.

6. I tell you that only one side was trying to use the QB rating.

7. You are oblivious as usual and claim other people are missing the point.

[GoSkins803]

i thought i posted this earlier, but i dont see it...

last year, Roethlisberger was sacked 46 times...only Matt Cassel was sacked more (as a patriot at 47)...the patriots went 10-6, the steelers won the super bowl

this year, by comparison, Campbell has only been sacked 38 times....so he'll need to go down 8 more times in the next 2 games to tie what happened to roethlisberger last year...

3 quarterbacks have been sacked more times than campbell this year (cassel, roethlisberger, and rodgers)....roethlisberger and rodgers both have over 3800 yards passing, 22 or more TDs, and QB ratings greater than 100....and, most importantly, their teams in the playoff hunt (although the steelers are barely hanging on)

in fact, although I can't find the stat right now, I believe in the 4 year time period during which the steelers won TWO super bowls, Roethlisberger was the most sacked QB in the league...

so....i guess the answer is, at the very least, Ben Roethlisberger and Aaron Rodgers could

edit: and I also found my post earlier so I will respond to the people that responded to that...

the Steelers did not win last year's super bowl because of defense, although it helped, they won it because of superb QB play...just practically speaking, watch the final drive roethlisberger did on Sunday that won that game for the steelers, the Packers sacked him twice and never rushed more than 4 people....and continuously pressured him with 3 and 4 man rushes...he still made the reads and won the game

say what you want, the Steelers' line is abysmal and has been for the last few years...did it help that their defense scored for them and gave them short fields? sure...but Roethlisberger reads a defense so much faster than Campbell the two don't belong in the same comparison league...

i guess I too am tired of this argument....does Campbell have things stacked against him because of his line? sure...

but the problem, as it has always been, is the Redskins greatest weakness (bad O-line) plays into Campbell's greatest weakness (he is mentally slow as a QB, both with his reads and his progressions)...what it takes someone like Eli, or Peyton, or Brady, or Big Ben, or Rivers 1.2 seconds to do, it takes Campbell 2.1 seconds to do...and that may not sound like a ton, but it is...Campbell is still in the top 50 of people doing it in the world....compared to you and me he's elite...compared to the top 5 or 10 qbs in this league he is slow...

i do think, put behind the Colts' offensive line, he would do much better, because when he has the time, he has the physical skills to make the plays (sometimes)

but it isn't a perfect world, and the Redskins are less than perfect...and their imperfections magnify campbell's imperfections

Great analysis here. I think it also emphasizes the incompetence in our F.O. over the years. It was their decision to try to "groom" Campbell. Gibbs drafted Campbell in (04?) to play in HIS offense- one that relies heavily on O-Line protection and a strong running game. We have seen that Campbell CAN thrive under these conditions- case and point the Saint's game.

Where the F.O messed up was that they tried to build a team around him, but didn't do it with his strengths/weaknesses in mind. Campbell's weaknesses were glaring from the start. He doesn't go through his progressions fast enough, etc (all stated already by other people on this board). Rather than playing to his natural abilities by giving him more time through the O-Line, they relied on him turning those weaknesses into strengths. In not drafting linemen/providing better depth at o-line, they were basically saying "Hey Campbell, you're a slow thinker and it takes you a couple of seconds longer than Ben Rothlesberger to go through your progressions, but here's a bunch of big rookie wide receivers. You can make your brain work faster right?"

Like you said, the team's imperfections magnify Campbell's imperfections. A competent F.O would have gone about building this team with more sense of direction. If they wanted to build a franchise around Campbell, then fine. But do so by playing to his strengths and putting him (and the rest of the team) in a position to do their job the best they can and really utilize their talent. If they want to build a franchise that runs Zorn's WCO, then fine, but then get a qb better suited for that job.

[Geneva]

I will be so glad to see the end of JC..... I wish the season ended today. All I can say for JC is goodby and goodluck. If they keep JC then we may as well keep Zorn...(got to Help JC work on that foot work)...JC's new book I can take a sack will be in the shops on 1 Jan 2010, along with Zorns book (I can call a play if I want to)...The followup books lost in the Red zone and blown coverage will be a must read.

[Drastik]

A lot of people look too far into stats as opposed to watching actual play.

If you watch Roethlisburger get sacked, more times than not he has ample time to throw the ball or make a decision. He holds the ball forever. Watch a Steelers game from start to finish, Ben get's time.

I'm not arguing that JC is on the level of Roethlisburger in any way what so ever, and I'm not arguing that JC does not hold the ball. However, comparing JC to Ben is ridiculous IMO... The majority of JC's sacks come from him being pressured before he even plants his foot to complete his drop back. Where as the majority of Ben's sacks come from him sitting in the pocket with plenty of time and just not finding guys, or waiting for things to develop instead of getting the ball out.

The same goes for Cassel in New England.

[#98QBKiller]

Well then we could say this correct?

In the NYG game, Campbell had worse stats, but led scoring drives that Collins couldn't. That is the true barometer I think you have to go by as a Skins fan.

This is a poor example considering Collins was only in for one drive. And on that one drive he got us to the red zone. On Jason's first three or four drives he failed to get the team a first down.

[THE TRUTH DETECTOR]

I believe the feeling is mutual with Campbell not being here.I would be so happy to leave this mess of a organization.The Carolina Panthers with that solid offensive line and strong running game want Campbell.The Redskins are years away and the next QB will take a beating as well. Your days of blaming Campbell will be over soon.

[jru37725]

I'm not saying Collins didn't do good, but it's amazing to me how people can gush so much over 1 deep pass and then act like JC did nothing when JC lead two touchdown drives that included a TD pass and the passes that setup the 2nd TD. But he did nothing but stink all game. The glasses that JC's supporters look through aren't near as rose colored as the glasses that the haters look through are black.

And this where the JC supporters just dont get it. Yeah he led 2 TD drives....but how long did it take him to do it and what was the score when that happened? TC comes in cold off the bench and throw 2 beautiful passes with the last one that should have been caught for a TD. It took him all of 4 plays. It took JC a half and 1 series and us being down 24-0.

[jru37725]

My views on Campbell are well-known.

He got his ass handed to him behind this horrible line last night. Absolutley destroyed.

However, his picks were just stupid. I know that he was getting killed, but those picks, those individual plays, were just dumb. I'm not going to defend him there.

Hey wait.....what about his screen pass into the ground that went 2 feet and he gets called for intentional grounding......after 50 games as a starter he doesnt know that he has to throw the ball past the line of scrimmage. Wow......and this is the guy our fans still want. A great person but the most losingest QB in the history of Redskins football. Maybe if he beats the Giants just ONCE i might change my mind. Todd Collins started vs the Giants just once....and is 1-0. And it was during their super bowl year. Case closed.

[THE TRUTH DETECTOR]

And this where the JC supporters just dont get it. Yeah he led 2 TD drives....but how long did it take him to do it and what was the score when that happened? TC comes in cold off the bench and throw 2 beautiful passes with the last one that should have been caught for a TD. It took him all of 4 plays. It took JC a half and 1 series and us being down 24-0.

:doh: How did we get down 24 points? at least...:doh: I am so glad I remember when the Redskins were a team instead the laughingstock they are now.We sitting here debating about 2 qb's who will not be here , no running game , a underwized WR group, no punt returners , a aging defense , a weak secondary, no coach , a stupid owner, and we worried about is Campbell better than Collins. Lord have mercy.They are twins.Ebony and Ivory. O yeah and no offensive line!! Yet a first round qb is going to magically fix everything. Bruce Allen is not going to fix this mess in a few years.The Redskins will NEVER wiin a Super Bowl unless Synder sells the team to the Cooke family. We know that will not happen. It is shameful what my team has become.Shameful :doh: Keep on debating and keep on looking up from the bottom of the NFC East and bottom of the NFC.