Peyton Manning says Jason Campbell's sounded positive - guess not - MODS LOCK THIS

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

so if you corrected Peyton Manning and told himt he accurate number, do you think he would change his opinion?

I don't.

His point is well made and valid, despite not being accurate on some of the facts.

campbell is okay, not great, and certainlty not bad. he has been ruined by Vinny, Dan, and this FO.

he'd give a generic cliche answer, just like all of his answers are going to be at superbowl week.

"well my point still stands, its real tough for a QB with all that change, im just glad i never had to deal with that in my career, im sure it would have been tough on me too".

hes just giving cliche "the right thing to say" answers. change is tough, we all know this. good QBs rise up. crappy ones dont. end of story.

[SonnyJ]

And dont act like everybody knew Manning was going to be great...those first years were shaky.

http://www.nfl.com/players/peytonmanning/profile?id=MAN515097

Look at every year beyond his rookie season (of course he was shaky as a rookie). Where do you see any hint of shakiness there?

That Peyton Manning was pretty damn good has pretty much been unquestionable to anyone watching football over the last 10 seasons.

[wvtbred]

And dont act like everybody knew Manning was going to be great...those first years were shaky. Where do u think the whole Jim Mora "Playoffs" outburst came from? After a game where Peyton threw 5 picks. And why was Mora even fired if things were great from day 1?

Tell that crap to someone who doesnt know any better

Only thing shaky was deciding when to give him the reins and let him run.

[icbmayday]

Peyton was just telling it honestly the guy has went threw a lot of adversity and is still out playing a lot of QB's in the league.

[TSO]

Blatant ignorance is blatant disregard for how other teams have chosen to attack the Redskins. Stack lines, play tight coverage, bring pressure, put the ball in Campbell's hands and force him to make quick decisions. The proof is in the pudding.

I think it's the absolute height of arrogance to suggest that since we disagree with your rose-colored view of Campbell, that we are the "bad guys" in the debate and are completely ignoring all facts. From my standpoint, the exact opposite is the case - the Campbell crowd is full of excuse-mongering.

If you do not like the debate, simply avoid it. If you all are so sick of discussing it, then don't respond. The debate is not whether or not he is average - the debate is if he can take the ball and win a game for you. There should be no debate about that. Others seem to think that that is unfair and what is really needed is a team with a crushing running game, fortress-like OL, swift and flypaper-handed receivers, and a punishing defense - the QB is just an afterthought. In this scenario, Campbell gets to watch while the running game and defense pound the opposing team into submission. Then, Campbell can fake a hand-off and then...well, I guess throw it to a guy who is wide open and not moving about 15-20 yards away. So, the FO sucks and his teammates suck because they do not give him the luxury of doing this.

Sorry, I don't think that is acceptable in this day and age for an NFL QB. YMMV.

I have trouble believing you actually read the entire posts you respond to. You had a back and forth with another poster in this thread that made it obvious you don't.

First, If you read my entire post I said that if we focused the debate on whether Campbell is just average or more than that, it would benefit the discussion. Yes, it is preposterous to suggest he's one of the worst QBs in the league. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that other than plain hatred and obvious bias. His numbers show that, at the very least, he's an average QB. You don't handle what he's had to handle and put those numbers up by being awful. You just don't. Put Kyle Boller in our offense this year and you'll see what awful looks like.

Second, trust me, I hardly ever respond. Ever. I'm so sick of the ignorance so many display when it comes to Campbell it takes a lot out of me to actually respond. The last time I really delved into this debate was last offseason, other than that, I rarely comment when you guys post comment after comment damning anything and everything that puts Campbell in any ray of positive light.

Good God, enough is enough. Don't tell me "If you do not like the debate, simply avoid it. If you all are so sick of discussing it, then don't respond". Clearly, you have no idea of what you're talking about when you respond to me with that, which isn't surprising seeing how stubborn you are when it comes to Campbell.

Whatever. Even BLC the other day was willing to agree that Campbell is simply "mediocre", and the guy debating him considered that a step, lol.

The problem your confused minds seem to have is you so easily equate "mediocre" with "awful", changing the very definition of the terms in the English language itself. :doh:

[pilsburypgh]

You Campbell fans find anything to boost up his name. Give it up.

[[[ghost]]]

You Campbell fans find anything to boost up his name. Give it up.

:rotflmao:

That was funny.

[KokoMike]

wow... i wonder if Mannings props can make JC release the ball faster and make the right decisions.

The only thing we can expect from Campbell now is, providing the Colts win the Super Bowl, he'll say something like:

"Peyton Manning has been in the same system for a long time, and it shows because they won the Super Bowl. I would have won a Super Bowl by now if I had been in the same system."

[THE HAMMER'IN HOG]

Thats all BS because the fact of the matter is that Saunders and Gibbs would of been back another year had Gibbs not quit. If they come back then there is no switch on offense...the same system stays.

We switched to the WCO because we had no choice when we hired Zorn and yes they thought he could improve JC which is something u would want from ur coach.

I guess thats why we wanted Fassell too...just to switch to the WCO and improve JC. Ur whole argument is BS.

And dont act like everybody knew Manning was going to be great...those first years were shaky. Where do u think the whole Jim Mora "Playoffs" outburst came from? After a game where Peyton threw 5 picks. And why was Mora even fired if things were great from day 1?

Tell that crap to someone who doesnt know any better

Gibbs didn't come back because he knew he was pushing a rock up a mountain with JC, there is a reason JC in his career [inc. college] gets a new offense every year, it's because he shows no ability whatsoever to progress in in any current offense he's in, that is why the drastic change, everyone is hoping that the next offense will click with him, but it never does.

Apparently you didn't see what everyone else did in Manning? Hence the #1 pick in the draft, which does explain your love affair with JC as far as being able to evaluate a players ability by his play on the field.

What did Manning have his 1st year? 26 TD's? You can sit here and talk up JC, and yet call 26 TD's and over 3700 yds his rookie year shaky? Peyton in his first year had better stats than JC has ever had and he is shaky, and iffy. That pretty much sums up the delusion that is the Campbell lovefest!

[Redknight13]

Gibbs didn't come back because he knew he was pushing a rock up a mountain with JC' date=' there is a reason JC in his career [inc. college'] gets a new offense every year, it's because he shows no ability whatsoever to progress in in any current offense he's in, that is why the drastic change, everyone is hoping that the next offense will click with him, but it never does.

!

I never understand why Jason's former coaches are so hell bent to play J. Campbell and risk their careers. Guess it shows you that coaches are not always right.

[KokoMike]

Here is part of an article about Campbell's days at Auburn:

"Things got so bad for Campbell at Auburn, thanks to a coach who was undermining him, that his rival, UGA's David Greene, was actually forced to defend Campbell at press conferences."

So, here is what could be included in an article today, six years later:

"Things got so bad for Campbell in Washington, thanks to (insert here: players, coaches, management, ownership, fans, critics, etc.) who were undermining him, that his rival, Colts' Peyton Manning, was actually forced to defend Campbell at a press conference."

Just so nobody focuses on the use of rival, here is the primary definition of rival in Merriam-Webster: "one of two or more striving to reach or obtain something that only one can possess" In fact, this may be a more important issue. Do you think Jason Campbell views Peyton Manning as a rival? Not hardly.

[HRNY4ZRNY]

http://www.nfl.com/players/peytonmanning/profile?id=MAN515097

Look at every year beyond his rookie season (of course he was shaky as a rookie). Where do you see any hint of shakiness there?

That Peyton Manning was pretty damn good has pretty much been unquestionable to anyone watching football over the last 10 seasons.

Wow never really looked at his stats before. Damn he is good. I didnt know he had that many TD's in his rookie year Peyton is a football God

[HRNY4ZRNY]

Here is part of an article about Campbell's days at Auburn:

"Things got so bad for Campbell at Auburn, thanks to a coach who was undermining him, that his rival, UGA's David Greene, was actually forced to defend Campbell at press conferences."

So, here is what could be included in an article today, six years later:

"Things got so bad for Campbell in Washington, thanks to (insert here: players, coaches, management, ownership, fans, critics, etc.) who were undermining him, that his rival, Colts' Peyton Manning, was actually forced to defend Campbell at a press conference."

Just so nobody focuses on the use of rival, here is the primary definition of rival in Merriam-Webster: "one of two or more striving to reach or obtain something that only one can possess" In fact, this may be a more important issue. Do you think Jason Campbell views Peyton Manning as a rival? Not hardly.

Nice good points cant disagree

[BleedinBurgNGold]

You Campbell fans find anything to boost up his name. Give it up.

What is it that you have against Campbell!!?? Obviously he isnt the best QB in the NFL, he is average. Not bad bot great just decent. He has improved in every category every single season despite the fact that he has went through a number of different coordinators. But yet some folks just get off on bashing the guy. Makes me wonder what the real motivation is....

Hide all your kitchen knives whem/if Shanny decides to bring him back.

[VRIEL1]

Eleven pages of fans asking or talking about Manning giving props to JC. Honestly I see it as more Manning BS. Everytime I turn on the tv all I see is Payton..... so how long before we start hearing more about his brother and father? I'm just so sick of the Manning family.

Don't get me wrong Payton is good, I'm just so sick of hearing about Payton, about hearing from Payton, of hearing about his family..... on and on. It happened the first time the Colts were in the SB and it's still happening. Dallas fans must be going through withdralls.

But as some other QB have said in the past it doesn't matter about having to change systems so many times. Reading the defense is the same no matter how you look at it. JC has issues with this. JC was under the same system for most of his contract here with the Skins. Then Zorn came in for 2 yrs.

Let me ask this question..... why did it take a Bingo caller to figure out that JC needed an arm band with the plays on it to help him out? JK.

I'm not raving for nor against JC. I just think JC's situation being brought up all the time is a little over rated. Manning is just a hell of a QB. He's accurate, smart, and a good clock manager. JC might be one of these.

[pilsburypgh]

What is it that you have against Campbell!!?? Obviously he isnt the best QB in the NFL, he is average. Not bad bot great just decent. He has improved in every category every single season despite the fact that he has went through a number of different coordinators. But yet some folks just get off on bashing the guy. Makes me wonder what the real motivation is....

Hide all your kitchen knives whem/if Shanny decides to bring him back.

I have no problem with JC. I just think we are waisting our time with him. If shanny brings him back then shanny will be just another coaching victim trying to figure out why our offense just cant seem to score points. Everyone has an right to an opinion and mine is that JC is a backup and has no business being a starter. Inconsistent and cant win games spells backup to me. I guess his STATS werent too bad considering we just played the easiest schedule in NFL History. I understand the JC fans though, I mean we aint had a franchise QB here since the 1700's. I guess any young QB with a arm would look promising to us. Oh but in like 2 years JC will be 30. Like at what point is he a grown man.

[darrelgreenie]

because contrary to the popular (on this site) opinion that it takes 5 years to judge a QB, it definitely doesnt.

Strawman

they saw campbell play for 7 games at the end of 2006, a nice starting point for a rookie. he had an entire offseason to get better, study more, learn more, progress, and in 07 he was probably worse than he was in 06.

For the sake of accuracy Campbell's rookie season was on the bench in a different offensive system then the one he played in 2006.

Which means a different gameplan, a different focus in the QB meetings.

Effectively Campbell season on the bench did nothing to help with the offense next season.

Agreed about 2006 his 1st year with Saunders.

2007 His second year with Saunders his 1st year as starter he played 13 games and was really starting to increase his production before his knee injury:

60.0% 2,700yds 12 TDs/11 Ints Sacked 21/13 games 77.6 Rating

It wasn't worse then 2006

and our FO clearly felt campbell wasnt responding like a 1st round QB should respond,

BS, conjecture, empty speculation or just outright fabrication.

especially after seeing Romo sits to pee killing it as a rookie, and watching eli take it up to the next level.

Also this statement is factually inaccurate for one it was Romo sits to pee 5th season and Eli wasn't exactly lighting it up with:

56.1% 3,336yds 23 TDs/20 Ints 73.9 QB Rating

so they decided to make a change to try and help campbell. i hope all of you realize that campbell is probably 90% of the reason we moved to a WCO. they were trying anything and everything to see that he succeeded. it wasnt clicking with saunders, so they said "maybe itll click in a different offense with a different coach?"

More BS, conjecture, empty speculation or just outright fabrication.

Also, even if the FO intended to help Campbell they way they went about it was dead wrong.

After vowing to maintain continuity they got rid of that when they let Saunders go.

The WCO was probably the offense least suited to Campbell's skillset and they were ignoring the OL.

so when people say manning benefited from stability in the colts organization, thats stupid.

I wonder who made this stupid statement:

It's been a tremendous help to me, just the consistency, the same offense, the same verbiage, the same guy calling the plays in my ears for 12 years. I don't take that for granted in the least bit and so I see these Qbs... Jason Campbell for the Washington Redskins... I think he's had 6 OCs in 6 years. That would be extremely tough. I think people forget about that when they're analyzing his play, you know, it's not fair as a QB to have that many coordinators and coaches. It's too hard, I would not do well in that type of environment, so I've been thankful everyday to have Tom Moore as my coordinator for my entire 12 years and I understand this may be his last year, so I appreciate what he's done for my career and I will never take for granted the consistency.

what's that? Oh, wait Peyton Manning himself made that statement?

the reason the colts are stable (pun not intentional lol) is because from day one manning proved he could light it up in that offense. why would they switch offenses for a rookie that threw 26 TDs

No doubt Peyton was great from the start but not every QB is Peyton Manning, but that doesn't change the fact that franchises and the QB linked to them only have chance to excell when there is continuity.

But, of course the above point of logic doesn't agree with your position against Campbell.

[SonnyJ]

I have trouble believing you actually read the entire posts you respond to. You had a back and forth with another poster in this thread that made it obvious you don't.

First, If you read my entire post I said that if we focused the debate on whether Campbell is just average or more than that, it would benefit the discussion. Yes, it is preposterous to suggest he's one of the worst QBs in the league. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that other than plain hatred and obvious bias. His numbers show that, at the very least, he's an average QB. You don't handle what he's had to handle and put those numbers up by being awful. You just don't. Put Kyle Boller in our offense this year and you'll see what awful looks like.

Second, trust me, I hardly ever respond. Ever. I'm so sick of the ignorance so many display when it comes to Campbell it takes a lot out of me to actually respond. The last time I really delved into this debate was last offseason, other than that, I rarely comment when you guys post comment after comment damning anything and everything that puts Campbell in any ray of positive light.

Good God, enough is enough. Don't tell me "If you do not like the debate, simply avoid it. If you all are so sick of discussing it, then don't respond". Clearly, you have no idea of what you're talking about when you respond to me with that, which isn't surprising seeing how stubborn you are when it comes to Campbell.

Whatever. Even BLC the other day was willing to agree that Campbell is simply "mediocre", and the guy debating him considered that a step, lol.

The problem your confused minds seem to have is you so easily equate "mediocre" with "awful", changing the very definition of the terms in the English language itself. :doh:

Wow. It must be so awesome to be so above the fray and to have all the answers. You're not thesubmittedone. You're Carnack.

Anyway, not sure what you're trying to convey. Oh, yeah, that you're right and that anyone that disagrees with you has not a clue of the discussion at hand and is an idiot. Thanks, but I'll hold my opinions as I see fit, Carnack. I'm quite capable of thinking for myself. Also, thanks for trying to frame the debate on terms you deem acceptable, too.

Oh, and describe Campbell and his play however you want. The bald truth of the matter is that, if your intent is to have a successful NFL football team, he is inadequate for the QB position. Go have your relative debates elsewhere, and, while you're at it, go find a post of mine where I said that Campbell is one of the worst QBs in the league. Worse than average? Certainly. To me, Kyle Orton is what I see in my mind's eye when I think of an average NFL QB. I believe that he is better than Campbell - I don't know what the #s were and I don't care. When I watch Kyle Orton, I see physical limitations and I see some questionable decision-making. But I also see a guy that, from my vantage point, seems to fundamentally have a better command of the position than Campbell. If I needed a QB to go out and win a game for me, either for an entire game or a final drive, I would pick Orton over Campbell. Without hesitation. Maybe that's familiarity breeding contempt, but I think I've seen enough of Orton to comfortably make that statement. Thus, if I believe Orton to be average, than Campbell must be worse than average. Beyond that, it doesn't really matter. I don't believe you can win with Campbell at QB, and I think we would have seen some solid indicaor of it by now, regardless of circumstance. The belief seems to be that he can win if you surround him with enough excellent parts, but the same could be said about a slew of guys that play the position, which hardly makes Campbell a keeper. For a team like this, it seems just any old plug-and-play QB would be sufficient. I don't believe that that is a viable model for a consistent contender. It's a fantasy that any organization can just keep a football machine like that churning year after year. Teams that contend every year are teams that have QBs that can win games when the rest of the team isn't operating at peak efficiency.

You're sick of it, huh? I'm sick of the ridiculous mindset that demands excellence from every other phase of the team in order to prop up a "mediocre" (happy now?) QB. I'm sick of the mindless infinite patience for a QB, but we have none for young receivers, OL, and other QBs on the team - those guys have to shine immediately or they are garbage. I'm sick of this belief that those that think it's time to get rid of Campbell are just irrational haters, when most had high hopes for him that began to wane last season when it was clear that the game was just not slowing down for him. I'm sick of the pathetic excuse-mongering that seems to put every deficiency on someone or something else. I'm sick of the idiotic #s argument - he started every game for a team that played an extremely easy schedule, struggled to run, and often found itself behind by large deficits in ballgames, which is a scenario that would tend to lend itself to compiling decent passing stats. I'm sick of the reflexive thought that since Campbell put up decent #s, he's at least average, but the team around him is awful - I mean, if the QB is so dependent on his teammates, and his #s are decent, shouldn't that reflect well on his teammates, too? I'm sick of how we have direct evidence from a couple of years ago of the amazing impact that competent QB play could have on this team, at a time when people were complaining about the same things as they are now, yet people will seriously argue that the QB change had little impact and it was a mere coincidence that the team started playing some dominant football at the EXACT same moment that the QB change happened.

Mostly, I'm sick of people like you that brush off every legitimate argument against Campbell as sheer stupidity, as if your version of reality is the only reasonable interpretation. The inane belief that everything can be discerned by the #s, even though we have watched every snap and can see how the #s don't come close to telling the whole story.

Good thing you're not arrogant, Carnack.

[ChillSkinzFan84]

Gibbs didn't come back because he knew he was pushing a rock up a mountain with JC' date=' there is a reason JC in his career [inc. college'] gets a new offense every year, it's because he shows no ability whatsoever to progress in in any current offense he's in, that is why the drastic change, everyone is hoping that the next offense will click with him, but it never does.

Apparently you didn't see what everyone else did in Manning? Hence the #1 pick in the draft, which does explain your love affair with JC as far as being able to evaluate a players ability by his play on the field.

What did Manning have his 1st year? 26 TD's? You can sit here and talk up JC, and yet call 26 TD's and over 3700 yds his rookie year shaky? Peyton in his first year had better stats than JC has ever had and he is shaky, and iffy. That pretty much sums up the delusion that is the Campbell lovefest!

Ive been watching football all my life so its nothing u can tell me about what happened since ive been watching that I dont know. Ofcourse everybody now is going to act like it was a lock that Peyton was going to be great...but ur not being real with yourself. By the way I always like Manning and thought he should be the #1 pick, but if u do not recall there was a big debate about the Leaf or Manning.

He was not the obvious #1 pick (to me he was) thats why there was so much hype about the draft that year. And People were making jokes about Manning those 1st few years...how many picks did he have his 1st year? Why would Jim Mora go on Peyton in the public media if he was such a slamdunk? Yes most people knew that eventually he would be good but it was not certain that he would be great. People still doubted him up to 06 because of his playoff performances...so dont sit here with hindsight and say he was a lock to be great because he is now.

Thats the problem with most people...they forget what things were like in the past...only think in the present. And I never said JC was great or on the level of Manning...but I continue to say he is good enough to win with. You JC haters act like he is garbage when its just not true. Anyone who really knows football knows that JC is decent but his growth has been stunted. Is it too late for him to become a top 10 QB in the leauge I dont know...but I know we could win with him. Thats all I ever said.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Strawman

For the sake of accuracy Campbell's rookie season was on the bench in a different offensive system then the one he played in 2006

"implying that gibbs/breaux and saunders weren't highly similar variants of the same offense"

Which means a different gameplan, a different focus in the QB meetings.

Effectively Campbell season on the bench did nothing to help with the offense next season.

Agreed about 2006 his 1st year with Saunders.

2007 His second year with Saunders his 1st year as starter he played 13 games and was really starting to increase his production before his knee injury:

60.0% 2,700yds 12 TDs/11 Ints Sacked 21/13 games 77.6 Rating

Never mind that already JC was behind the curve, and had looked decidedly mediocre before the injury. At this point, JC had 18 starts, and his production was well behind that of many other star-quality QBs.

The WCO was probably the offense least suited to Campbell's skillset and they were ignoring the OL.

I'm going to say this in big letters so you people get it, because I know the implication you are trying to make and it is WRONG. And in the style of Umineko, I will say it in RED.

Jason Campbell was never suited for the Al Saunders offense, or any other offense designed to pick up large chunks of yardage through deep passes. Jason Campbell is a terrible deep ball thrower so the implication that he would be better in a system geared towards throwing the deep ball is patently ridiculous. Zorn's short to intermediate variant of the WCO was the perfect system for him as it minimized his biggest weakness as a quarterback.

But, of course the above point of logic doesn't agree with your position against Campbell.

Sure, Campbell would be a better QB with more organizational stability and a better line. But how much of one? Campbell's ceiling to me looks like someone who can put up good numbers in the context of a great system and an above-average team around him...but is THAT what you want out of your QB? After a half-decade of developmental investment? Jake Delhomme was a 4th round pick sitting on the New Orleans bench - even though he turned out to be a bit better than a game-manager, that's what the Panthers got him to be. We invested a 1st, a 3rd and a 4th to take Campbell, as well as 5 years of development. Is a ceiling of, say, 3250-3500 yards, 18-22 TDs, 8-14 INTS, and a 80-85 QB rating with zero ability to win in the clutch or elevate the play of his team or do anything OTHER than be the product of a system worth the time, development and effort we have put into making him a viable NFL QB?

The fact is, we can either take a chance of getting a franchise QB in the draft, or we can stick with Jason Campbell and hope we can be dominant - and I mean this - DOMINANT - on both sides of the ball because if the rest of the team isn't really, really, really good, we're not winning a Super Bowl, or having consistent postseason success with him.

[darrelgreenie]

"implying that gibbs/breaux and saunders weren't highly similar variants of the same offense"

Similiar? Yes, but going from Gibbs a run heavy version to Al Saunders pass happy 700 page playbook is a big difference.

But, my point isn't only that the offense was different.

But there was change from day 1.

Going from Gibbs to Saunders even though they are similiar is still change.

And change is the last thing you want with a developing QB.

Never mind that already JC was behind the curve, and had looked decidedly mediocre before the injury. At this point, JC had 18 starts,

I agree that JC was behind the curve because of the change from his rookie year to his 2nd year, but his production especially a few games before his injury was on an uptick and he was starting to flash the QB we drafted him to become. (Imo we really could have used another WR that year)

http://www.nfl.com/videos/washington-redskins/09000d5d8041cbbd/NFL-GameDay-Eagles-vs-Redskins-highlights

http://www.nfl.com/videos/washington-redskins/09000d5d8044c64a/Cowboys-28-Redskins-23

and his production was well behind that of many other star-quality QBs.

While i agree wasn't on par with 'star' QBs it was on par with what one could reasonably expect for a player in his situation; and it wasn't 'far' behind 'star' QBs.

I'm going to say this in big letters so you people get it, because I know the implication you are trying to make and it is WRONG. And in the style of Umineko, I will say it in RED.

Jason Campbell was never suited for the Al Saunders offense, or any other offense designed to pick up large chunks of yardage through deep passes. Jason Campbell is a terrible deep ball thrower so the implication that he would be better in a system geared towards throwing the deep ball is patently ridiculous. Zorn's short to intermediate variant of the WCO was the perfect system for him as it minimized his biggest weakness as a quarterback.

Is that a Kill Bill reference? Kudos.

But, i disagree sir and i'm going say it green

1st JC deep ball was a strong suit before the Zorn era.

But, throwing the 'deep ball' isn't the sole definition or the main aspect of a deep passing offense.

A downfield passing game relies on throwing 10-15-20 yard passes usually from 5 steps or from 7 step drop play-action. It requires the arm strength to drive the ball downfield on routes like the deep comeback, dig route or deep in route, the square out, the post route etc.

Those types of passes are JC strong suite and Al Borges WCO or 'gulf coast' offense in college featured these types of routes and Campbell had on of the sickest YPA in college it was somewhere in the area of 10 yes 10 ypa.

Zorn's WCO partially by neccesity centered around the 3 step drop quick rhythm passing, which wasn't JC stong suit. Funny thing is that being forced into Zorn's little dink centered WCO was beneficial to Campbell QB.

Campbell became an effective WCO QB.

Sure, Campbell would be a better QB with more organizational stability and a better line. But how much of one? Campbell's ceiling to me looks like someone who can put up good numbers in the context of a great system and an above-average team around him...but is THAT what you want out of your QB? After a half-decade of developmental investment? Jake Delhomme was a 4th round pick sitting on the New Orleans bench - even though he turned out to be a bit better than a game-manager, that's what the Panthers got him to be. We invested a 1st, a 3rd and a 4th to take Campbell, as well as 5 years of development. Is a ceiling of, say, 3250-3500 yards, 18-22 TDs, 8-14 INTS, and a 80-85 QB rating with zero ability to win in the clutch or elevate the play of his team or do anything OTHER than be the product of a system worth the time, development and effort we have put into making him a viable NFL QB?

I don't understand how a fan that truely understands all the mistakes the FO has made in attempting to develop the team and JC as a QB can talk as if they can know JC 'ceiling'. You need the right pieces around to gauge 'ceiling' for example imo its safe to say that Matt Leinart to this point in his career hasn't gotten it yet because that team around him was ready to go. Yet, i don't think its fair to write of Smith in San Fran because he's had a ton of change around him and showed promise under Norville then had the rug pulled out from under him.

The NFL is all about right now, and right now JC was the 15th rated QB in the league despite everything that happened last season.

Logic tells me that if JC was 15th in the league under these circumstances then his stats this season aren't his 'ceiling' but rather this season was indicative of his floor.

I don't get caught up in where a guy was drafted stuff.

The fact is, we can either take a chance of getting a franchise QB in the draft, or we can stick with Jason Campbell and hope we can be dominant - and I mean this - DOMINANT - on both sides of the ball because if the rest of the team isn't really, really, really good, we're not winning a Super Bowl, or having consistent postseason success with him.

Either way i'm willing and looking forward to see what Shanahan can do with him.

HTTR!

[dc1]

Strawman

For the sake of accuracy Campbell's rookie season was on the bench in a different offensive system then the one he played in 2006.

Which means a different gameplan, a different focus in the QB meetings.

Effectively Campbell season on the bench did nothing to help with the offense next season.

Agreed about 2006 his 1st year with Saunders.

2007 His second year with Saunders his 1st year as starter he played 13 games and was really starting to increase his production before his knee injury:

60.0% 2,700yds 12 TDs/11 Ints Sacked 21/13 games 77.6 Rating

It wasn't worse then 2006

BS, conjecture, empty speculation or just outright fabrication.

Also this statement is factually inaccurate for one it was Romo sits to pee 5th season and Eli wasn't exactly lighting it up with:

56.1% 3,336yds 23 TDs/20 Ints 73.9 QB Rating

More BS, conjecture, empty speculation or just outright fabrication.

Also, even if the FO intended to help Campbell they way they went about it was dead wrong.

After vowing to maintain continuity they got rid of that when they let Saunders go.

The WCO was probably the offense least suited to Campbell's skillset and they were ignoring the OL.

I wonder who made this stupid statement:

It's been a tremendous help to me, just the consistency, the same offense, the same verbiage, the same guy calling the plays in my ears for 12 years. I don't take that for granted in the least bit and so I see these Qbs... Jason Campbell for the Washington Redskins... I think he's had 6 OCs in 6 years. That would be extremely tough. I think people forget about that when they're analyzing his play, you know, it's not fair as a QB to have that many coordinators and coaches. It's too hard, I would not do well in that type of environment, so I've been thankful everyday to have Tom Moore as my coordinator for my entire 12 years and I understand this may be his last year, so I appreciate what he's done for my career and I will never take for granted the consistency.

what's that? Oh, wait Peyton Manning himself made that statement?

No doubt Peyton was great from the start but not every QB is Peyton Manning, but that doesn't change the fact that franchises and the QB linked to them only have chance to excell when there is continuity.

But, of course the above point of logic doesn't agree with your position against Campbell.

Darrelgreenie..... Thanks! I'm a fan of well thought opinion that just happens to be supported by credible sources as well as fact based analysis.

But that's just me.....

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Similiar? Yes, but going from Gibbs a run heavy version to Al Saunders pass happy 700 page playbook is a big difference.

But, my point isn't only that the offense was different.

But there was change from day 1.

Going from Gibbs to Saunders even though they are similiar is still change.

And change is the last thing you want with a developing QB.

I agree that JC was behind the curve because of the change from his rookie year to his 2nd year, but his production especially a few games before his injury was on an uptick and he was starting to flash the QB we drafted him to become. (Imo we really could have used another WR that year)

Only was able to see the Dallas link (as a former JC defender, that was basically THE game I used to defend his potential) but now that I rewatch it, his throws weren't THAT great - Moss made an amazing catch, Cooley got so open I could probably throw him a T

While i agree wasn't on par with 'star' QBs it was on par with what one could reasonably expect for a player in his situation; and it wasn't 'far' behind 'star' QBs.

Is that a Kill Bill reference? Kudos.

But, i disagree sir and i'm going say it green

Actually, you're supposed to say it in BLUE but anyway:

1st JC deep ball was a strong suit before the Zorn era.

Jason Campbell was 13 of 52 on passes over 21 yards in 2007.

But, throwing the 'deep ball' isn't the sole definition or the main aspect of a deep passing offense.

A downfield passing game relies on throwing 10-15-20 yard passes usually from 5 steps or from 7 step drop play-action. It requires the arm strength to drive the ball downfield on routes like the deep comeback, dig route or deep in route, the square out, the post route etc.

Campbell has never displayed a consistent ability to hit these passes, and he has certainly never been good hitting post routes, which are often the biggest yardage routes in the game.

Furthermore, if he was capable of employing these passes, his numbers would not look so horrendous, season after season.

Those types of passes are JC strong suite and Al Borges WCO or 'gulf coast' offense in college featured these types of routes and Campbell had on of the sickest YPA in college it was somewhere in the area of 10 yes 10 ypa.

Campbell benefited from a nearly unstoppable run game, which forced defenses to focus on Brown and Williams without placing too much pressure on Campbell.

Zorn's WCO partially by neccesity centered around the 3 step drop quick rhythm passing, which wasn't JC stong suit. Funny thing is that being forced into Zorn's little dink centered WCO was beneficial to Campbell QB.

Campbell became an effective WCO QB.

Even prior to the collapse of the offensive line in the second half of 2008, Campbell was mostly a dink and dunk QB. He had a month of impressive YPP stats against the Browns, Lions and Rams.

Furthermore, December was Campbell's least sacked month. Yet he did not return to his previous production.

I don't understand how a fan that truely understands all the mistakes the FO has made in attempting to develop the team and JC as a QB can talk as if they can know JC 'ceiling'.

You measure this based on what Campbell has shown. Even with all the chaos and with all the issues with line, playcalling and such - Campbell, after 5 years in the NFL, doesn't seem to have the basics of being an effective NFL QB down completely.

There are certain things that can only be improved on, but not taught from scratch.

Release.

Football IQ.

Ability to read defenses.

Accuracy, especially in tight spots such as the deep

Yet, i don't think its fair to write of Smith in San Fran because he's had a ton of change around him and showed promise under Norville then had the rug pulled out from under him.

Smith isn't very accurate, nor is he great at reading defenses. His release isn't great either. In fact, he reminds me a lot of Campbell - Campbell was touted as an intelligent QB as well as Smith, and I suppose it was assumed that overall intelligence would translate into football intelligence...but not really.

Smith, like Campbell would make a pretty good backup.

Logic tells me that if JC was 15th in the league under these circumstances then his stats this season aren't his 'ceiling' but rather this season was indicative of his floor.

Someone else mentioned this, but the fact that JC played from behind a lot, and and played a soft schedule actually padded his stats a bit.

[VRIEL1]

Alright here's my take on our precious JC.....

#1- JC has the arm to get the ball down field but that's where his problems start. He's not accurate with the ball. Many of times the ball was either over thrown, under thrown or no where near the WR. You want proof go back and look at the games. It's been mentioned here and on about every other board that JC wasn't throwing the long ball accurate.

#2- Timing. How many times had we seen Moss or ARE or Cooley go on a slant route or crossing pattern only to have the ball thrown behind them? Definitly every game.

#3- Finess. JC only knows how to throw the ball one way..... hard. When the ball is to be thrown 20 yrds or farther then strong arming the ball is ok, but when you have a short slant route or a 5-10 yrd route the ball sometimes needs to be gently passed to the WR. Instead JC throws the ball like he's throwing a 90 mile an hour fast ball and lets see.... how many times did the ball go through our Receivers hands? Too many.

#4- Has trouble reading defenses. One would think that in the 5-6 yrs he's had in the league he would be able to identify where the rush is coming from and be able to "move" his protection to that side. But... not JC. Perhaps some of it was Zorn not giving JC plays to change to or the ability to do so.

I know it sounds like I'm bashing him but JC does have some redeaming qualities...

#1- He's very poised in the pocket. He doesn't get rattled very easily.

#2- He's tough. He definitly can take a hit and get back up.

#3- He's smart with the ball. Meaning he knows if the play is not there to throw it away.

#4- He has a low interception rate. Although that goes hand and hand with the balls either being thrown away or over thrown or dirt balls.

To me JC is a good QB but will never be a great QB. He's a QB that can come in when your #1 QB goes down and win the game for you.

I know I'll get slammed by the JC lover's but oppinions are like A-holes and everyone has one right. Well for my 2 cents thats mine. So far Gibbs, Saunders, Zorn, and now Shanahan think they see potential but I think his potential has capped out, For whatever reason he's got issues. The only way he turns out to take us to the SB is if we build an OLine that gives him all day to throw. People said the Oline was not giving him time to throw....maybe, but how much time does he need to throw? Most QB's only get 3-5 seconds to get rid of the ball. Thats about what JC had. They showed in one game how much time Breese had to throw and he only had like 3-4 seconds. The team bought time by rolling him out. My point? Although the Skins Oline was horrid it's the coach's duty to game plan around that and JC's duty to get the ball out to someone.

[TheItalianStallion]

6 of those came in trash time in 4th

Which 6 were those?