Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

NFP-Matt Bowen: Should the Redskins keep Jason Campbell?

Chump Bailey

By Chump Bailey
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

Chump Bailey

Chump Bailey

Posted
Posted

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Should-the-Redskins-keep-Jason-Campbell.html

There have already been reports and speculation — from the Washington Post — that the Redskins and new coach Mike Shanahan are looking at drafting a QB with the No. 4 pick this April.

Sam Bradford of Oklahoma was the first name to surface, and the National Football Post’s Wes Bunting — in his first mock draft of the 2010 offseason — pegged Notre Dame’s Jimmy Clausen to the ‘Skins in the first round.

APCould Notre Dame's Jimmy Clausen land in Washington?

Bradford vs. Clausen is a nice discussion (and one we’ll have later this offseason), but where does that leave last year’s Redskins starter, Jason Campbell?

For me, it has always been hard to judge Campbell’s career as the quarterback in Washington. He’s played for multiple head coaches and multiple offensive coordinators, not to mention the disaster he and his offense went through last year under Jim Zorn.

To call that playing in an adverse situation would be an understatement. We never got to see what Campbell could truly do. Does he have issues with his game? Of course, but there’s still plenty of talent there. Keeping Campbell around is the smart play for the ‘Skins. And it’s a necessity, in my mind, if reports are correct about Shanahan’s desire to start developing that talent at QB.

Please visit link at top to continue reading...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Sinister

Mr. Sinister

Posted
Posted

Not Again. The Campbell debate has beaten beaten over the head more times then Tina Turner. He's Patrick Ramsey ll. Not saying he doesn't have talent, just that he's been through so muchconstant change that he never had a chance to even sit down and collect his thoughts , not to mention getting torn to shreds last year. I think he's damaged goods. I hope I'm wrong though

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hiro

Hiro

Posted
Posted

I do agree with this. Even if we decide to draft a QB of the future, I would rather let him sit back for a bit, even for half a season, and soak in the system while we play Campbell and let him show if he's worth anything in the Shanahan system. Campbell played decently when we had an actual play caller calling the plays, and Shanahan's among the tops in the league when it comes to offensive play calling.

Tendering him to a 1 year deal honestly would be a win-win situation for us. If he pans out in the system, great. We have a guy who can continue to play and we could possibly trade, or we let the young guy sit and continue to develop until Campbell is either let go or suddenly starts to play like he did at times last season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
terpskins10

terpskins10

Posted
Posted
Hasn't JC pretty much come out and said he isn't going to be a backup?

With the RFA tender, he doesn't really have a choice.

If we do draft a QB at 4 and he sticks around, it will be up to him to hold off the rookie for the entire year until he's a UFA. I think he might request a trade, but if we can't get anything for him I can't see it becoming too big a problem that would affect the locker room.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darth Tater

Darth Tater

Posted
Posted
Not Again.

Have you not noticed the pattern? One week, Scheffter or somebody writes an article praising Campbell or at leas saying he'll "likely" be our starter while not necessarily rejecting the notion of the Redskins going with a top QB. The next week, the same guys use basically the same article with enough changes to downgrade Campbell. On the pro-Campbell article week, some Campbell jock sniffers will post it here and other places as proof positive that Campbell is at least good enough and there'll be big debate. On the con week, some Campbell haters will post it here and other places as proof positive that Campbell sucks and there'll be a big debate. ALL THE WHILE, THEY ARE THE SAME ARTICLE WITH JUST A FEW CHANGES!!!

:ols:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sweet Sassy Molassy

Sweet Sassy Molassy

Posted
Posted
Have you not noticed the pattern? One week, Scheffter or somebody writes an article praising Campbell or at leas saying he'll "likely" be our starter while not necessarily rejecting the notion of the Redskins going with a top QB. The next week, the same guys use basically the same article with enough changes to downgrade Campbell. On the pro-Campbell article week, some Campbell jock sniffers will post it here and other places as proof positive that Campbell is at least good enough and there'll be big debate. On the con week, some Campbell haters will post it here and other places as proof positive that Campbell sucks and there'll be a big debate. ALL THE WHILE, THEY ARE THE SAME ARTICLE WITH JUST A FEW CHANGES!!!

:ols:

Very true. Campbell haters and supporters are pretty much the exact same people, but on the opposite end of the spectrum.

Campbell lovers will uses stats to show why Jason is the guy, which Campbell haters will respond by saying that stats don't show the full story. Campbell haters will show stats to explain why Jason isn't the guy in which Campbell lovers will respond by saying that stats don't show the full story. It's quite comical really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
terpskins10

terpskins10

Posted
Posted
Ok stay with me what if we draft a QB @ 4 and JC turns out to be a perfect fit in Shannys O....then what...honestly no JC spin involved with this question

Campbell "hater" answer: He won't.

My answer: Good question. I'd say he gets franchise tagged and held out in trade. I don't think if we draft a QB at 4 that Campbell has any chance of staying around long term. Too much money gets invested into those top picks, which is risky even without a salary cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bushwack

bushwack

Posted
Posted
Ok stay with me what if we draft a QB @ 4 and JC turns out to be a perfect fit in Shannys O....then what...honestly no JC spin involved with this question

Won't happen, plain and simple. If Shanahan believes Jason is a great fit and can become a great QB in his system, then Shanahan won't draft Bradford or Clausen at #4.

IMO if Shanahan drafts a QB at #4 then that says he doesn't believe Jason is the best fit for his system and believes either rookie will have a better chance to lead the Skins to success than what Jason can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
1972FAN

1972FAN

Posted
Posted
Have you not noticed the pattern? One week, Scheffter or somebody writes an article praising Campbell or at leas saying he'll "likely" be our starter while not necessarily rejecting the notion of the Redskins going with a top QB. The next week, the same guys use basically the same article with enough changes to downgrade Campbell. On the pro-Campbell article week, some Campbell jock sniffers will post it here and other places as proof positive that Campbell is at least good enough and there'll be big debate. On the con week, some Campbell haters will post it here and other places as proof positive that Campbell sucks and there'll be a big debate. ALL THE WHILE, THEY ARE THE SAME ARTICLE WITH JUST A FEW CHANGES!!!

:ols:

Yeah its called covering your bets, what a joke, these guys are clueless. We know more about our team than they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...