Jason Campbell traded to the Bills? Marshall to the Skins? pure speculation.

[grego]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=1693

Matt Moore came in Wk 13, went 3-1. You really don't think Campbell could have replicated that, give the better O-line, running game, defense?

matt moore looked good the last 3 games, but if that were campbell, the excuses would be "minnesota didnt care, the giants were getting killed by everybody BUT the redskins at the end of last season, and NO played their backups"

i've heard more 'garbage time' and other excuses for campbells #'s than i can count. hell, i even heard quinton ganther was the reason we won one game where campbell played well and ganther had 50 yards rushing.

[Riggo#44]

Buffalo for sure. I'd move Arizona and St, Louis to the debateable section. Leinert needs to play, and, if Bulger stays and is healthy, I don't think they'd want Campbell. The rest would't improve with Campbell. Oakland has Gradkowski, and Carolina has Matt Moore. Both did very well (Moore, extremely) when they replaced the starters.

Here's the acid test: I want to see how Moore does when he gets sack 15 times in 4 games...and not have Deangelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart behind him.

Moore played very well...but also has a very good supporting cast.

Tarvaris Jackson is openly mocked here, but, to finish out '08, performed at a level Campbell could only dream of. Sure, he folded like a tent in the playoffs, but I don't think I need to say anything about Campbell and the playoffs.

I'll give you Moore -- but come on. Jackson? Please. He was in the playoffs for Adrian Peterson, and that Defense. Another player who has done less than Campbell, but gets more credit for 3 games. Gradkowski the same thing.

Unfortunately, Campbell has become the whipping boy for all the frustration of the Cerrato Era. He doesn't deserve it. If he whined and complained and cried like so many players do, that would be another thing. He has had more adversity this past season than most QBs face in their career. And has handled himself with class and dignity.

Again, he is not, nor will he ever be, an elite QB. He is adequate and that's about it. The QB position needs to be upgraded. But there is a lot more than just Campbell for why we currently suck.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

i understand what you are saying. but the 67 yard run by jackson happened on the first drive of the game. and the 57 yard bomb to jackson was in the first half.

hard to blame that on the O, especially the first one. i'm an equal opportunity blamer- when the D sucks and gives up big plays, i say so. when campbell sucks, i say so.

thats not a good example either. not only did the falcons open up the game with a near 6 minute opening drive (followed by 2 unsuccessful runs and a sack of campbell), theres this -

Michael Turner put the offense on his shoulders and carried the Falcons to victory. He finished with 166 rushing yards and his 58-yard touchdown run midway through the fourth quarter put the game away. Washington had dominated the second half to that point, with two long scoring drives, but Turner's dash changed the momentum.

turner not only rushes for 166 yards against our D that you insist is great, he puts the game away on a 56 yarder after 2 LONG (key word there) scoring drives by the O.

so you just proved why our offense sucks and why TOP is meaningless: when you have big play ability and dont need 8 minutes to score a TD, you put pressure on the other team. both of these teams put major pressure on us to score as quickly as they did, and our offense is a joke, so the only times we could muster long drives were when we were down by 20 points.

these arent good examples of the O keeping the D on the field, there were countless other examples of times where the offense couldnt get it done when the game was in reach, panthers, lions, and first cowboys game come to mind.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

matt moore looked good the last 3 games, but if that were campbell, the excuses would be "minnesota didnt care, the giants were getting killed by everybody BUT the redskins at the end of last season, and NO played their backups"

Hmm? The only other team that killed them was Minny, and I doubt you could say they didn't care; they were on a cold streak and they really wanted to go into the playoffs with some momentum.

The best you can say is that Campbell is about as good as Moore. Except Campbell needed 5 times the starts to produce at the level Moore did at the end of last season.

i've heard more 'garbage time' and other excuses for campbells #'s than i can count. hell, i even heard quinton ganther was the reason we won one game where campbell played well and ganther had 50 yards rushing.

Care to explain why his best situational numbers are when he is behind by 9+ points? Or that he's terrible in the 4th quarter when the score is within one TD?

[Riggo#44]

Hmm? The only other team that killed them was Minny, and I doubt you could say they didn't care; they were on a cold streak and they really wanted to go into the playoffs with some momentum.

The best you can say is that Campbell is about as good as Moore. Except Campbell needed 5 times the starts to produce at the level Moore did at the end of last season.

Moore looked good -- but lets give him more than four games. I mean there have been plenty of QBs that put up good numbers over a handful of games and then disappear...

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

I was asking a serious question, yet you seem to always answer in some sarcastic way.

From what I remember we got within 7 points in the 4th quarter while we dominated the TOP and came back strong in the 2nd.

sorry, i just found your question to be stupid IMO. a game where were losing by 21 points at half time and a guy is rushing for 166 yards and our offense only shows signs of life once the game was brutally out of reach isnt anything id call close to winning.

we were close to winning the first cowboys game.

we were close to winning the saints game.

we were close to winning the chargers game.

we were close to winning the panthers game.

the falcons game was one of the worst games of the season for this team. the falcons eased off the gas with a huge lead, and theyd have won anyways without turners 50+ yarder to seal it for them. unless you can say with a straight face that youd have trusted our offense to actually come back from a 21 point deficit against the previous NFC south champs on the road.

[Hunter_R]

I'll give you Moore -- but come on. Jackson? Please. He was in the playoffs for Adrian Peterson, and that Defense. Another player who has done less than Campbell, but gets more credit for 3 games. Gradkowski the same thing.

Gradkowski did it with one of the worst teams in the league. Not to mention he brought the Oakland-freaking-Raiders from behind to win games.

Back to Jackson, though. Just look at the last games he started in. They were, obviously hesitant at first, but Jackson made the most of it. The next game, he managed to throw for 4 tds (Campbell has never done this). The final two games, they actually let him throw a lot, and he did well for himself.

[Riggo#44]

Gradkowski did it with one of the worst teams in the league. Not to mention he brought the Oakland-freaking-Raiders from behind to win games.

Oh Gradkowski played with one of the worst teams in the league? What were we?!

Come on. There is no way you can honestly believe Brad Gradkowski is a better QB. It's not even close. In three games with Cleveland, Gradkowski had a 33% completion percentage. This is just ridiculous.

Back to Jackson, though. Just look at the last games he started in. They were, obviously hesitant at first, but Jackson made the most of it. The next game, he managed to throw for 4 tds (Campbell has never done this). The final two games, they actually let him throw a lot, and he did well for himself.

Three games. Really. Why ignore the other craptacular games? I can pull three games where Campbell played really well too...

[THE HAMMER'IN HOG]

Once again -- all Campbell's fault that the line can't block, Rogers/Hall/Landry have no clue what "double move" even means...

And yes Campbell "lost" to Carolina -- but I don't recall who it was that couldn't tackle the same Delhomme on that crucial play...was that Campbell playing both ways?!

Really? 'Cause I feel the same way about that assessment, esp. considering Carolina finished 8-8 with THIS at QB:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=1693

Matt Moore came in Wk 13, went 3-1. You really don't think Campbell could have replicated that, give the better O-line, running game, defense?

What better option is there right now? Really. Of all the list of problems this team faces, QB is hardly top of the list. What? You want to throw Bradford or Clausen behind that line? Chalk that one up for another one of the dumbest thing a fan has said...

But the way some people go on and on about horrible Campbell is -- they ignore just about every other MAJOR issue and just simple-mindedly drop all of the blame at Campbell's feet...and then create 42 threads about it...

You destroy your entire argument with that comparison, it just goes to show that a QB can make a huge difference between winning and losing. Same scenario we have here with JC and Collins, Collins out plays the starter, the same as Moore outplayed Delhomme, how did that happen? Carolina was lousy until Moore stepped in, did they suddenly rebuild the O-line, or start playing better defense, or get some other receivers to complement Smith?

As far as JC's ability to outplay Delhomme, or put up the same numbers as Moore? That is the blindness that is the JC defense team, automatically he is better than Delhomme, or as good as Moore, of coarse he's never remotly done anything to prove that, yet we will just assume that he is because we can't live with the fact that a journeyman backup like Moore can outplay the incumbent starter, where have we heard that before?

It really is not up to me to think JC can win in Carolina, it is up to JC to prove that he can win in DC, which so far he hasn't come close, but keep dreaming of what could be if JC just didn't keep running into such bad luck, and how all the other successful QB's are just lucky they fell into the ideal situation, or the planets were not aligned properly with the universe last season, whatever keeps the JC dream alive!

[Riggo#44]

You destroy your entire argument with that comparison' date=' it just goes to show that a QB can make a huge difference between winning and losing. Same scenario we have here with JC and Collins, Collins out plays the starter, the same as Moore outplayed Delhomme, how did that happen? Carolina was lousy until Moore stepped in, did they suddenly rebuild the O-line, or start playing better defense, or get some other receivers to complement Smith?[/quote']

You make no sense. You don't think Campbell for a whole year in Carolina would have produced 2 more wins over what Jake Delhomme produced?

Collins outplayed the starter almost 3 years ago, in a completely different system. One he had been in for 10 years. How did he look in that KC game? Worse than Campbell.

As far as JC's ability to outplay Delhomme' date=' or put up the same numbers as Moore? That is the blindness that is the JC defense team, automatically he is better than Delhomme, or as good as Moore, of coarse he's never remotly done anything to prove that, yet we will just assume that he is because we can't live with the fact that a journeyman backup like Moore can outplay the incumbent starter, where have we heard that before?[/quote']

Please tell me I am misreading that line and that you didn't just say that Delhomme was the better QB last year. Please, for the sake of my sanity...

Matt Moore a journeyman back up? He's 25 and really only had time with Carolina after a stint on the Cowboys practice squad. How does that equate being a Journeyman?

And the JC whiners are a model of objectivity aren't they?

It really is not up to me to think JC can win in Carolina' date=' it is up to JC to prove that he can win in DC, which so far he hasn't come close, but keep dreaming of what could be if JC just didn't keep running into such bad luck, and how all the other successful QB's are just lucky they fell into the ideal situation, or the planets were not aligned properly with the universe last season, whatever keeps the JC dream alive![/quote']

:doh:

Read this part slowly, I'll give you time to sound out the words:

For the umpteenth time, JC is an adequate starter. He will not be a pro-bowl QB. Ever. Go back and point out where I have ever said he was ever going to be anything more than that. He is however one of the least of our problems right now. I am all for upgrading the position -- even with Bradford or Clausen. However to heap ALL of the blame at his feet is absurd.

[grego]

Care to explain why his best situational numbers are when he is behind by 9+ points? Or that he's terrible in the 4th quarter when the score is within one TD?

my thinking is that if a guy has only thrown 4 TD's in the 4th quarter all year, how can anyone possibly accuse him of padding his stats by playing in 'garbage time'?

for every 'respectable' part of campbells performance anyone names, someone comes up with a reason to knock it. i dont think one has to do that. i think its possible to look at the good and the bad, put them in context, and judge his performance from there.

he's not an elite QB, and he's not the worst. there is, actually, a middle ground.

[THE HAMMER'IN HOG]

You make no sense. You don't think Campbell for a whole year in Carolina would have produced 2 more wins over what Jake Delhomme produced?

Collins outplayed the starter almost 3 years ago, in a completely different system. One he had been in for 10 years. How did he look in that KC game? Worse than Campbell.

Please tell me I am misreading that line and that you didn't just say that Delhomme was the better QB last year. Please, for the sake of my sanity...

Matt Moore a journeyman back up? He's 25 and really only had time with Carolina after a stint on the Cowboys practice squad. How does that equate being a Journeyman?

And the JC whiners are a model of objectivity aren't they?

:doh:

Read this part slowly, I'll give you time to sound out the words:

For the umpteenth time, JC is an adequate starter. He will not be a pro-bowl QB. Ever. Go back and point out where I have ever said he was ever going to be anything more than that. He is however one of the least of our problems right now. I am all for upgrading the position -- even with Bradford or Clausen. However to heap ALL of the blame at his feet is absurd.

What you fail to acknowledge is that JC has had a fair shake over the last 3 seasons, he's had players around him and failed, so to blame a banged up O-line for his failure is ignorant, plenty of successful QB's had as bad, or worse case scenarios and they succeeded.

The problem here is you just can't throw in the towel on JC, you have 1 excuse after another for him, Collins had 10 years in the same system, or some how Campbell is now better than Delhomme? You do know Delhomme took his team to a SB right? IMO Delhomme at this point in his career is the same QB as Campbell, so your insistence JC is some how better than Delhomme is nothing more than a failure to admit how bad JC is by comparison.

[Riggo#44]

The problem here is you just can't throw in the towel on JC' date=' you have 1 excuse after another for him, Collins had 10 years in the same system, or some how Campbell is now better than Delhomme? You do know Delhomme took his team to a SB right? IMO Delhomme at this point in his career is the same QB as Campbell, so your insistence JC is some how better than Delhomme is nothing more than a failure to admit how bad JC is by comparison.[/quote']

Do you actually think before you post...or do you just start typing away? Clearly you don't read.

For the umpteenth time, JC is an adequate starter. He will not be a pro-bowl QB. Ever. Go back and point out where I have ever said he was ever going to be anything more than that. He is however one of the least of our problems right now. I am all for upgrading the position -- even with Bradford or Clausen. However to heap ALL of the blame at his feet is absurd.

Clear enough for you?!

And how is a guy who thows 8TDs and 18 INT in 13 games is better than someone who throws 20TDs and 15 INT? How? Cambbell would be an upgrade NOW, not 7 YEARS ago.

I am done here. It's clear you're throwing out names that used to be good...

[Hunter_R]

Oh Gradkowski played with one of the worst teams in the league? What were we?!

Come on. There is no way you can honestly believe Brad Gradkowski is a better QB. It's not even close. In three games with Cleveland, Gradkowski had a 33% completion percentage. This is just ridiculous.

Three games. Really. Why ignore the other craptacular games? I can pull three games where Campbell played really well too...

You think the Skins are on the same level of bad as the Raiders? The Raiders have a worse record than the Lions since their last trip to the playoffs. That's particularly hard to do when the Lions even have a season with no wins.

I don't see how Gradkowski's performance in Cleveland has any bearing with his performance in Oakland.

I'm not ignoring anything from Tarvaris. He improved greatly in his last few performances (4, not 3) after a pretty bad start the year prior. Jackson, also, barely has over a year of starting experience. He ended on a high note. Campbell cannot do this, and he's barely ever started on a high note.

[Riggo#44]

You think the Skins are on the same level of bad as the Raiders? The Raiders have a worse record than the Lions since their last trip to the playoffs. That's particularly hard to do when the Lions even have a season with no wins.

I don't see how Gradkowski's performance in Cleveland has any bearing with his performance in Oakland.

So, if we traded Campbell for Gradkowski, one for one, you'd be happy? The same Gradkowski who is a 53.3% passer for his career? B/c he won 2 games with Oakland? Give me a break.

I'm not ignoring anything from Tarvaris. He improved greatly in his last few performances (4, not 3) after a pretty bad start the year prior. Jackson, also, barely has over a year of starting experience. He ended on a high note. Campbell cannot do this, and he's barely ever started on a high note.

:doh:

Campbell looked pretty good going 6-2 over the 1st 8 games in 2008. There you go. Better than Jackson.

Dude. Tavaris Jackson sucks. Brad Gradkowski sucks. Give me real evidence, other than a spattering of games from journey backups...

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Campbell looked pretty good going 6-2 over the 1st 8 games in 2008. There you go. Better than Jackson.

see this is whats nonsense. he didnt look that good during that stretch, which is why so many people hate that example. he sucked against the giants, he sucked against cleveland, he sucked against the rams, he sucked against the eagles. thats half of those games during that stretch where he was weak, yet we won 3 of those games because our run game carried him.

had he looked "pretty good" we'd have seen 15 TDs, a few blowout wins, some monster games against god awful teams, anything resembling a very good QB. you got a few nice games, sprinkled in with 2 300 yard games, one being against the worst team in NFL history.

so no, he didnt look pretty good.

[Riggo#44]

see this is whats nonsense. he didnt look that good during that stretch, which is why so many people hate that example. he sucked against the giants, he sucked against cleveland, he sucked against the rams, he sucked against the eagles. thats half of those games during that stretch where he was weak, yet we won 3 of those games because our run game carried him.

had he looked "pretty good" we'd have seen 15 TDs, a few blowout wins, some monster games against god awful teams, anything resembling a very good QB. you got a few nice games, sprinkled in with 2 300 yard games, one being against the worst team in NFL history.

so no, he didnt look pretty good.

I was being sarcastic...really though, you can't tell me that you would honestly take Delhomme (now, not 7 years ago), Jackson or Gradkowski over Campbell?

[THE HAMMER'IN HOG]

Do you actually think before you post...or do you just start typing away? Clearly you don't read.

Clear enough for you?!

And how is a guy who thows 8TDs and 18 INT in 13 games is better than someone who throws 20TDs and 15 INT? How? Cambbell would be an upgrade NOW, not 7 YEARS ago.

I am done here. It's clear you're throwing out names that used to be good...

I know, I know, your the only one around here who clearly understands JC.:notworthy:rolleyes:

What you fail to comprehend throughout this debate is that I understand that you think JC is not great, you beleive he is adequate, but what you fail to comprehend is that I and many others do not believe JC is ADEQUATE, CAPISHE? And to further that you are here fighting with others over what you believe is an adequate QB? Why? What is your definition of an adequate QB? That may bring to the surface your real motive behind slugging it out with anti JC posters for an ADEQUATE QB.

Here is a news flash, some of us are not satisfied with Adequate, at least in your sense, because the definition to most for the word adequate is the ability to get the job done, but not great, which means JC is far from adequate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So again I ask the question why the big defense of at very best an adequate QB? I think substituting the word mediocre for adequate would make your case more believable.

You also fail to realize that JC's numbers which we can start with the most important of those is 4-12, was amassed against the easiest schedule in NFL history, that's right, but let's just gloss over that little bit of information for what you would call an adequate QB, and allow me to repeat, against the the easiest schedule in the history of the NFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

I was being sarcastic...really though, you can't tell me that you would honestly take Delhomme (now, not 7 years ago), Jackson or Gradkowski over Campbell?

gradkowski maybe. personally i think jackson is worse and delhomme, while i think hes a much more intelligent QB with a proven track record just doesnt have it in the tank anymore.

but do you see how sad this is? youre asking me if id take campbell over a bunch of bottom feeders or washed up vets. we shouldnt be having this discussion.

its like asking "would you rather get kicked in the nuts or thrown out of a moving car?". both are bad. arguing about which one is better doesnt make either of them nice options lol.

[Riggo#44]

I know' date=' I know, your the only one around here who clearly understands JC.:notworthy:rolleyes:[/quote']

Yes, please enlighten me...Can we really start a QB who can throw 20 INTS!!! So long as he was good almost a decade ago!!

What you fail to comprehend throughout this debate is that I understand that you think JC is not great' date=' you beleive he is adequate, but what you fail to comprehend is that I and many others do not believe JC is ADEQUATE, CAPISHE? And to further that you are here fighting with others over what you believe is an adequate QB? Why?[/quote']

B/c I am tired of EVERYTIME, EVERYTIME there is a mention of Campbell there is a horde of idiots who take over the thread, making ridiculous claims, calling for freakin' Colt Brennan...it's unbearable.

What is your definition of an adequate QB? That may bring to the surface your real motive behind slugging it out with anti JC posters for an ADEQUATE QB.

This is what i think of Campbell. He put up pretty decent numbers is a terrible situation. He'll stand in there and take a beating and keep going. Not complaining. He'll have good games' date=' he have stinkers...He did a far better job than many of the comparisons he getting here. He is far from the main problem.

Here is a news flash, some of us are not satisfied with Adequate,

Maybe you should go back and read where I said I wanted ot upgrade the position, instead of being a complete...going to stop there before I get some time off.

at least in your sense' date=' because the definition to most for the word adequate is the ability to get the job done, but not great, which means JC is far from adequate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So again I ask the question why the big defense of at very best an adequate QB? I think substituting the word mediocre for adequate would make your case more believable.[/quote']

Didn't you JUST ask that?

You also fail to realize that JC's numbers which we can start with the most important of those is 4-12' date=' was amassed against the easiest schedule in NFL history, that's right, but let's just gloss over that little bit of information for what you would call an adequate QB, and allow me to repeat, against the the easiest schedule in the history of the NFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/quote']

Yet Jake Delhomme did a better job last year?

You're right, it's all Campbell's fault.

Newsflash. We have BIGGER HOLES TO FILL. We have a 2ndary that doesn't know what a double-move looks like. We have an offensive line that is the WORST in the league. We have highly-questionable wide receivers. We have running game made up of a couple of nobodies and a primadonna back who is breaking down.

But I bet all of those are Campbell's fault too.

Jesus Christ -- did he sleep with your wife and run over your dog as he left?

Where is the hate for Stephon Heyer, Mike Williams, Laron Landry (who was worse than Campbell last year), Fred Smoot, et al?

[Riggo#44]

gradkowski maybe. personally i think jackson is worse and delhomme, while i think hes a much more intelligent QB with a proven track record just doesnt have it in the tank anymore.

but do you see how sad this is? youre asking me if id take campbell over a bunch of bottom feeders or washed up vets. we shouldnt be having this discussion.

its like asking "would you rather get kicked in the nuts or thrown out of a moving car?". both are bad. arguing about which one is better doesnt make either of them nice options lol.

My point is, some people are really going overboard in their Campbell hate. I don't think QB is top of the list when it comes to problems of this team right now. Not to the level of attention, threads, idiotic posts that Campbell gets.

He is fine for a year or two.

[THE HAMMER'IN HOG]

Yes, please enlighten me...Can we really start a QB who can throw 20 INTS!!! So long as he was good almost a decade ago!!

B/c I am tired of EVERYTIME, EVERYTIME there is a mention of Campbell there is a horde of idiots who take over the thread, making ridiculous claims, calling for freakin' Colt Brennan...it's unbearable.

This is what i think of Campbell. He put up pretty decent numbers is a terrible situation. He'll stand in there and take a beating and keep going. Not complaining. He'll have good games, he have stinkers...He did a far better job than many of the comparisons he getting here. He is far from the main problem.

Maybe you should go back and read where I said I wanted ot upgrade the position, instead of being a complete...going to stop there before I get some time off.

Didn't you JUST ask that?

Yet Jake Delhomme did a better job last year?

You're right, it's all Campbell's fault.

Newsflash. We have BIGGER HOLES TO FILL. We have a 2ndary that doesn't know what a double-move looks like. We have an offensive line that is the WORST in the league. We have highly-questionable wide receivers. We have running game made up of a couple of nobodies and a primadonna back who is breaking down.

But I bet all of those are Campbell's fault too.

Jesus Christ -- did he sleep with your wife and run over your dog as he left?

Where is the hate for Stephon Heyer, Mike Williams, Laron Landry (who was worse than Campbell last year), Fred Smoot, et al?

Actually I was wondering if he was sleeping with you?

Or we could ask where is all the love for such adequate type players?

[SWFLSkins]

Jesus Christ -- did he sleep with your wife and run over your dog as he left?

Where is the hate for Stephon Heyer, Mike Williams, Laron Landry (who was worse than Campbell last year), Fred Smoot, et al?

Actually I was wondering if he was sleeping with you?

__________________

Wow, It probably would be best to agree to disagree, shake hands and walk away at this point. You both make some really great points but you have both regressed in your representation of those points and just went into insulting each other. Just an outsiders point on this.

[PCS]

Hi guys. Just making sure that everyone's getting a long and not saying anything too stupid in here. You know. Just making sure this one doesn't go the same way as many others.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

My point is, some people are really going overboard in their Campbell hate. I don't think QB is top of the list when it comes to problems of this team right now. Not to the level of attention, threads, idiotic posts that Campbell gets.

He is fine for a year or two.

weve been losers for a long time and we havent had good consistent QB play for a long time.

were going to continue to be losers until we get a franchise QB in here. you can talk about how the oline needs to be fixed and how we need this or that, but at the end of the day, its the QB that dictates how this team plays, not the guy playing left tackle.

so again, until we get a franchise guy, were going to lose or simply be mediocre. i have higher expectations than that, it seems that others simply dont.