Release: REDSKINS SIGN REX GROSSMAN

[Morneblade]

While red zone efficiency is nice, it doesn't really tell us anything about Campbell that we don't already know - he's good, very good making the right play and the safe play, not the big play. The fortunate thing is that this is exactly what is needed inside the red zone.

Oh, I think it does. There are some VERY vocal people that think Campbell is horrible, period. The FACT that he was VERY GOOD in the RZ is completely opposite of what they like to claim. When 18 of 41 completions in the RZ are for TD's that tells you the guy IS money in the RZ. On top of that, he doesnt give the ball away so you can get points, and he got sacked 1 time so you dont get out of FG range. You cant do any more than this.

I was honestly shocked that we were top 10 in red zone TD percentage. We blow a prolific offense like Dallas OUT OF THE WATER. And the difference between 2008 and 2009 is astounding - a 9% increase.

At the same time, we were closer to the bottom in terms of RZ attempts.

With a powerful running game that can consistently get him inside the 20s, Campbell can potentially be productive, however, it will have to be good enough to compensate for the fact that he's pretty meh outside the 20 and isn't good at making big plays to open up the defense. Regardless of whether you think it's the line or him, he just has not had success hitting guys deep, to the extent that other good quarterbacks do.

I was suprized as well at the stats. Back to your other point, there shouldnt be any surprise that the line and playcalling had a ton to do with it. Here are some very scary facts. Out of 75 players that played either Right Tackle or Left tackle at some point last year, Stephon Heyer ranked 70th. Levi Jones ranked 74th. When you have your 2 starters in the bottom 5, you are ****ing doomed. Dockery was our best offensive lineman, coming in at a respectable 23rd for Guards (out of 84). Our next best was Will Montgomery, who was a paultry 68th. Casey Rabah was the 25th rated Center in the league. How anyone can possibly think our line was anything more than a complete disaster, I will never understand. On a slightly positive note, I looked what Chad Rinehart did, and while he didnt get enough snaps to qualify, he would have ranked 48th out of 84 guards. He might be getting it. As for playcalling, when you have a guy that had been out of football for years come in out of the blue and your offenseive output goes from 12 points a game to 22 points a game. Witht he same players. You got to look at the previous playcalling. And when the guy that made the playcalling change gets canned, and the offense once again sputters...you got to look at the play calling.

Scoring inside the 20 is not so much about making big plays to move the ball downfield - it's about not turning the ball over and getting the ball to an open guy.

What? Do you even realize how ass backwards you have this? Scoring inside the 20 is ALL about getting the ball to the open guy and not turning it over. Scoring OUTside the 20 might be abit more aboutmaking big plays, but once you get inside the 20, you shouldnt be taking alot of chances.

Ultimately, the biggest arguments why he has to be replaced (and soon) come down to:

1: He's not a playmaker

2: He's horribly unclutch

3: He doesn't have a real command of the offense, even in terms of pre-snap reads and audibles (i.e before the big nasty defensive linemen blow past the turnstiles and try to kill him)

1. 18 of 41 completions in the RZ are for TDs. QB rating of 110.9. THAT is making plays.

2. See above. Add to that: doesnt take sacks and doesnt throw INT's. THAT is clutch.

While 3 may be fixed in time, I doubt 1 and 2 will be. So what happens if he plays well enough to stay around, and we end up with a 11-5 ceiling because he's struggling in playoff situations, or falling apart late in games?

This is the one area he needs to really step it up in. He has a good rating for the 2nd half of games is plays very well when behind by 7+ points (QB rating of 112) but when either behind by 7 or less or ahead by 7 or less his qb rating is 74 and 76, which is marginal. And the 4th quarter within 7 points he only has a 61 QB rating. This is the one area in which he is not good in. I will also say he didnt get alot of attempts here so it's a small sample size, but it's not very pretty.

We can make the playoffs with Campbell, most likely, but I don't see us winning a title unless we swap our supporting cast with that of the New York Jets.

Which is basically what all teams need to go and win a SB. You have to be very good everywhere. Most people are not under the idea that Campbell can pick up a average (or worse) football team and put it on his back. He cant. He needs guys around him to play well for the team to win games. But there are very few people that can do that in the history of the game, so nothing new there. Campbell would need to be part of some very good football teams to win Superbowls. Which is exactly the kinds of teams that do win superbowls. Going back to some of the best Offensive teams that won (49ers in the 80's, Redskins of the 80's, Cowboys of the 90's, Steelers of the 70's) all those teams had top defenses as well. One guy isnt going to win a SB, but one guy can loose it. Ask Sexy Rexy about it.:cool:

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Now you really getting stupid BLC. If I didnt think QB's were important, would I be so up in arms about Grossman? No. I just happen to see a whole bunch of factors that contrubted more to the problem than Jason Campbell. Much more in fact. Which is why Im not so agaisnt him, and think with improvements in coaching, playcalling and hopefully OL, we'll be much better next year. I worry about our D now though, actually.

You have no idea, son. None. Running your mouth means nothing if people dont respect you. Going out and working harder than everyone else gains respect. Putting more time into preperation gains respect. Just because your not a ra-ra guy doenst mean you are not a leader. Anyone thing Joe Montana was a bad leader? "Cool" Joe didnt talk much. In fact, in the 88' Superbowl, down 3 with about 2 min left and over 80 yards to go, Montana points out that Jon Candy is in the stands and "how cool is that". No big stupid hollywood speach. Just guys, it's a game and isnt it awesome that we are here. Of course they pick the Bengals apart on that drive and Taylor scores with like 30 odd seconds to go. That is a leader. Glaring at people or getting in their face isnt.

you dont even seem up in arms, it seems like you just think its funny and that he has no chance to start so why even bother getting flustered. and frankly you go way overboard with the grossman hate. hes far from good but you make him sound like the worst QB of all time, which he blatantly isnt.

and joe montana led by example. quiet? sure. a monster? yes. once we get a QB that starts putting up joe montana numbers, i dont care what kind of speeches he gives.

and performance gains you respect, not how much time you spend working out in ashburn. players respect guys that produce and win games for you. this warped notion that the guys who "give it all they got" and play "good soldier" is such cliche nonsense its ridiculous. they might get respect in terms of who they are as a person, but as a football player, these guys care about one thing: winning games.

if you wanna see effort guys, coach a little league team. these are paid professional athletes making millions of dollars. effort is 2nd place at this level.

[mistertim]

I guess you missed the Tampa game last year where he threw three INT's, had three fumbles (lost two) and nearly decapitated a Ref. Oh, yeah... I guess it doesn't count because we beat one of the worst teams in the league and someone still had the nerve to start a thread asking if Campbell had finally "turned a corner."

Guess that corner went right to Sesame Street.

3 INTs and 2 TDs, yes. I remember. He certainly did not play well that game. But if you're trying to say that is a bad Campbell game (which it was) and compare it to a bad Grossman game (I don't even have to tell you...just look it up) then that is a bit much. I mean seriously...the guy had 3 games in one year where his QB rating was 10 or lower. I know QB rating doesn't tell you everything, but any rating THAT bad over a whole game tells you something. Can you imagine what would happen here if Campbell played a game where he completed more passes to the opposing defense than he did his own receivers? Holy crap. Dogs and cats living together, MASS HYSTERIA!

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Witht he same players. You got to look at the previous playcalling. And when the guy that made the playcalling change gets canned, and the offense once again sputters...you got to look at the play calling.

Well - to be fair, it seems to be an assumption that Zorn took back playcalling duties based on the Vinny firing. It may be valid, but there's no evidence of it.

What? Do you even realize how ass backwards you have this? Scoring inside the 20 is ALL about getting the ball to the open guy and not turning it over. Scoring OUTside the 20 might be abit more aboutmaking big plays, but once you get inside the 20, you shouldnt be taking alot of chances.

I...thought I said that? At worst, I said it at the beginning of the post.

1. 18 of 41 completions in the RZ are for TDs. QB rating of 110.9. THAT is making plays.

It's making plays within a limited (albeit obviously important) context - inside the RZ. I think I said somewhere that that was the #1 thing Campbell supporters could hang their hat on - the very good QBs get TDs inside the 20.

2. See above. Add to that: doesnt take sacks and doesnt throw INT's. THAT is clutch.

Again, within the context of one area.

This is the one area he needs to really step it up in. He has a good rating for the 2nd half of games is plays very well when behind by 7+ points (QB rating of 112) but when either behind by 7 or less or ahead by 7 or less his qb rating is 74 and 76, which is marginal. And the 4th quarter within 7 points he only has a 61 QB rating. This is the one area in which he is not good in. I will also say he didnt get alot of attempts here so it's a small sample size, but it's not very pretty.

Again, that speaks to issues with pressure, as well as the fact that close late game situations play to what he is NOT good at - making big plays in the passing game.

Which is basically what all teams need to go and win a SB. You have to be very good everywhere. Most people are not under the idea that Campbell can pick up a average (or worse) football team and put it on his back. He cant. He needs guys around him to play well for the team to win games. But there are very few people that can do that in the history of the game, so nothing new there.

Not asking him to do that. But lately, we've been experiencing a trend of decidedly incomplete teams winning Super Bowls due to either great or clutch QB play (and some due to dominating defense)

Colts in 2009 with guys like Garcon, Collie, and the worst run game in football Saints with Bell, Meachem, Bushrod and a turnover producing defense that gave up a lot of yards and points

Warner with a terrible defense, Roethlisberger with a terrible offense and a line that was nearly as bad as ours.

The Giants, believe it or not, were terrible defensively except, of course, when they had to play in the playoffs. The Pats had no running game, as great as they were.

The Colts had no running game in 2007 either. The Bears were having throwgasms and their WRs sucked.

The Steelers had a mediocre offense. The Seahawks were actually a pretty complete team, but they were a dropped pick-6 from being knocked out.

The third Pats team was a VERY complete team from top to bottom. The Panthers were actually a very complete team - Delhomme threw 29 TDs that year.

The second one kind of wasn't, not much of a run game but a great defense. The Eagles were a better team on paper but McNabb choked.

Bucs had a historic defense. Raiders had a complete team but they got dismantled completely.

And finally, the Pats, who had nothing other than Tom Brady to speak of, beat the Rams who were one of the better teams in the history of the league.

So, you have a few really great teams there, a really great defense, and a lot of places where the team overall is not that dominant talent-wise, but the common denominator? Great QB play, or clutch QB play.

You can't have teams like you did in the 80s. You really can't. I've explained why ad nauseum. The Hogs would have dismantled in 1985 if there was a salary cap in place. You need a great quarterback, because no matter what, you will have to plug and play pieces as guys earn big contracts and leave via free agency or decline with age without being able to replace them quickly. How many Pro Bowl caliber LBs have the Colts gone through this decade? Or the Steelers? Just to give an example.

If we build a defense like the Jets have, any team can go the distance. But defensive performance is fickle - a key injury there, a decline in play here, all of a sudden, your defense is just not good enough anymore. When Laron Landry stopped playing like a borderline Pro-Bowl cover FS, oops, there went the defense. Only two teams have maintained top 10 defensive performance over a FIVE year horizon, let alone a 10 year one - the Steelers and Ravens. Horton's regression didn't help much either. A great QB is the ultimate hedge against personnel uncertainty, because of their individual impact on the game.

Tom Brady wouldn't have taken us to the SB, but he probably could have gone 8-8.

I'm not asking Campbell to go 10-6 with a historically bad line. But even under the worst conditions, I want to think we have a quarterback who can make at least a few monster plays, or who can pick apart a defense (other than the Lions lol) during the rare game that he DOES have time, or can be better than terrible throwing deep.

[Morneblade]

you dont even seem up in arms, it seems like you just think its funny and that he has no chance to start so why even bother getting flustered. and frankly you go way overboard with the grossman hate. hes far from good but you make him sound like the worst QB of all time, which he blatantly isnt.

The guy is alot worse than Campbell, whom you have said doesnt even belong in the league as a backup. So as blatant overreacting goes.....yeah, you win. Now go back to what I was saying before he was signed, I think you'll see I was pretty adamant against Grossman. He is here now and I will deal with it the best way I can. Fully embracing the Dragon.

and joe montana led by example. quiet? sure. a monster? yes. once we get a QB that starts putting up joe montana numbers, i dont care what kind of speeches he gives.

He wasnt great at first. And was still quiet. But he had the respect of his teamates before he became great. I had a very long post on leadership that got eaten by ES crashing on me a couple hours ago for you. Maybe I'll get around to redoing sometime, I actually think you will find it interesting.

and performance gains you respect, not how much time you spend working out in ashburn. players respect guys that produce and win games for you. this warped notion that the guys who "give it all they got" and play "good soldier" is such cliche nonsense its ridiculous. they might get respect in terms of who they are as a person, but as a football player, these guys care about one thing: winning games.

I'll try and remember the part of what I had written earlier that applies to this point. Performance gains respect, yes. But so does hard work under bad situations. And so does not ****ing about stuff when things do not look good. I've been a member of alot so different teams (soccer, football, basketball) as well as in the military. How you conduct yourself under duress does matter. Clinton Portis for example, is not a leader. Even when he was putting up 1500 yard seasons. He was a a very good player that didnt work and ran his mouth. Basically Geoff George with better stats. No one listens to him and they probably dont have much respect for him. And it also means they are not gonna go the extra mile for him. Guys that bust their tale and are in there working when other guys are not does mean something. If nothing else others question if they are working hard enough. Competative guys dont like to be out-worked. Now, I've not been in the running for a SB or a National Championship in the NCAA, but I have competed at a pretty high level. And I've also seen active duty, where things are alot more important than a "game". It makes a difference, you'll just have to trust me on that one.

if you wanna see effort guys, coach a little league team. these are paid professional athletes making millions of dollars. effort is 2nd place at this level.

Wrong Answer. Effort is the difference between Anthony Montgomery and Albert Haynesworth. If Monty busted his ass he'd be a heck of a player, he has alot of talent. He doesnt, and he's a 3rd string player that could be cut at anytime with guys like Golsten playing ahead of him. Peyton Manning is NOT the most talented QB in the league, but he out works all of them. Everyone at this level has talent. Not everyone works as hard as they can to be the best they can be. If "Effort" meant nothing, then you wouldnt have guys like Reed Doughty being on the team, much less being our most solid safety. Or guys like Jared Allen tearing up the league, because he was drafted last as a freakin' long snapper. He just outworks people.

[Hiro]

you dont even seem up in arms, it seems like you just think its funny and that he has no chance to start so why even bother getting flustered. and frankly you go way overboard with the grossman hate. hes far from good but you make him sound like the worst QB of all time, which he blatantly isnt.

I personally see him for what he is, as a guy who plays with a gunslinger mentality and is bad at it.

Every now and then in Chicago during the '06, he'd have these amazing games. But then, he would just crumble and just play atrociously, and I don't think he's ever been able to recapture that good play he had. Regardless though, the only reason he has a job with us is because he knows our playbook. I personally don't think he's any threat to Campbell as the starter, even if there is competition. If anything, Colt may be a bigger threat to Campbell (which isn't saying a lot, and please know that I'm not a Campbell fanatic).

[Morneblade]

Well - to be fair, it seems to be an assumption that Zorn took back playcalling duties based on the Vinny firing. It may be valid, but there's no evidence of it.

Fair enough, but seems rather telling.

Not asking him to do that. But lately, we've been experiencing a trend of decidedly incomplete teams winning Super Bowls due to either great or clutch QB play (and some due to dominating defense)

I'll disagree in part to this. Defensively nearly all the teams were very good.

2000 - Balt - #1

2001 - Pats - #6

2002 - Bucs -#1

2003 - Pats - #1

2004 - Pats - #2

2005 - Pitt - #3

2006 - Colts - 23

2007 - Giants - 17

2008 - Pitt - #1

2009 - NO. - #20

Most of what I have here also applies to below

Colts in 2009 with guys like Garcon, Collie, and the worst run game in football Saints with Bell, Meachem, Bushrod and a turnover producing defense that gave up a lot of yards and points

Warner with a terrible defense, Roethlisberger with a terrible offense and a line that was nearly as bad as ours.

The Giants, believe it or not, were terrible defensively except, of course, when they had to play in the playoffs. The Pats had no running game, as great as they were.

The Colts had no running game in 2007 either. The Bears were having throwgasms and their WRs sucked.

The Steelers had a mediocre offense. The Seahawks were actually a pretty complete team, but they were a dropped pick-6 from being knocked out.

The third Pats team was a VERY complete team from top to bottom. The Panthers were actually a very complete team - Delhomme threw 29 TDs that year.

The second one kind of wasn't, not much of a run game but a great defense. The Eagles were a better team on paper but McNabb choked.

Bucs had a historic defense. Raiders had a complete team but they got dismantled completely.

And finally, the Pats, who had nothing other than Tom Brady to speak of, beat the Rams who were one of the better teams in the history of the league.

So, you have a few really great teams there, a really great defense, and a lot of places where the team overall is not that dominant talent-wise, but the common denominator? Great QB play, or clutch QB play.

I'm gonna say you have really good defense as well. 6 out of 10 years there is a top 3 D winning. 7 out of 10 is a top 6 winning. That is actually more prevalent that QB play.

You can't have teams like you did in the 80s. You really can't. I've explained why ad nauseum. The Hogs would have dismantled in 1985 if there was a salary cap in place. You need a great quarterback, because no matter what, you will have to plug and play pieces as guys earn big contracts and leave via free agency or decline with age without being able to replace them quickly. How many Pro Bowl caliber LBs have the Colts gone through this decade? Or the Steelers? Just to give an example.

Qb's are a heck of alot more costly than Olmen. And if you look at what Shanahan is doing now, NOT giving big contracts and getting a bunch of "solid" players in here for alot less money is how you build great teams that last. Ask the Pats about that. As for LB's I'm not sure why you put Pittsburg there. Seems like they put ALOT of LBs in the Pro Bowl.

Harrison in 09'.

Harrison and Farrior 08'.

Harrison in 07'.

Off year in 06'.

Porter in 05'.

Farrior and Porter in 04'.

Off year in 03.

Porter and Gildon in 02'.

Bell and Gildon in 01'.

Gildon in 00'.

Sorry, but they own the LB spot in the probowl.

If we build a defense like the Jets have, any team can go the distance. But defensive performance is fickle - a key injury there, a decline in play here, all of a sudden, your defense is just not good enough anymore. When Laron Landry stopped playing like a borderline Pro-Bowl cover FS, oops, there went the defense. Only two teams have maintained top 10 defensive performance over a FIVE year horizon, let alone a 10 year one - the Steelers and Ravens. Horton's regression didn't help much either. A great QB is the ultimate hedge against personnel uncertainty, because of their individual impact on the game.

Tom Brady wouldn't have taken us to the SB, but he probably could have gone 8-8.

I'm not asking Campbell to go 10-6 with a historically bad line. But even under the worst conditions, I want to think we have a quarterback who can make at least a few monster plays, or who can pick apart a defense (other than the Lions lol) during the rare game that he DOES have time, or can be better than terrible throwing deep.

Helps if you have competent coaching too. Something we have missed here for some time. And as for how things have been run, I dont think we had competency in that dept for over a decade. I'm not sure how good Brady would be with our Oline and Zorn calling plays and Vinnie running the show. But I'm guessing he wouldnt be much better than our 4-12 last year. I mean, he wasnt much better than Matt Cassel was last year. And he is no Joe Montana.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Well, for the Steelers, I meant to say "how many pro bowl linemen have they RELEASED" due to free agency, etc. Porter, Farrior, Bell, Gildon, etc.

Imagine the Colts defense in 2007 with Marcus Washington at LOLB, Mike Peterson at MLB, and Cato June at ROLB with a healthy Bob Sanders?

I think I can agree that defense, so far, has been a stronger common denominator than QB play, though, but I also think it is really hard to build a #1 defense (and you need the right defensive mind to do it - 5 SBs are from Belichick and LeBeau combined, which make up 5 of the 7 elite SB winning defenses. I like Haslett, and he's better than Blache, but he's sure as hell no Dick LeBeau or Bill Belichick.

Also, I was wrong, the Patriots maintained that as well. But that's a tough act to follow, and asssuming Roethlisberger doesn't go to jail, they'll have both elite QBs and monster defenses for the next 5 years or more.

I think you are SERIOUSLY stretching it to assert that Brady could not have led this squad to better than 4 wins. Come on. That is simply ridiculous.

And that's without even addressing the implication that Campbell is anywhere near Brady as a player.

[akorn22]

I like this signing considering campbell can make anyone look like a good qb. Campbell and grossman have a lot in common though, minus the playoff and super bowl experience that grossman has and campbell lacks

[Morneblade]

Well, for the Steelers, I meant to say "how many pro bowl linemen have they RELEASED" due to free agency, etc. Porter, Farrior, Bell, Gildon, etc.

Gotcha. That shows 3 things, they draft well and they run a good scheme and execute it. And they dont over pay FA's either. The opposite of what we have done in the past.

Imagine the Colts defense in 2007 with Marcus Washington at LOLB, Mike Peterson at MLB, and Cato June at ROLB with a healthy Bob Sanders?

Would have been pretty scary of they had some beef in the middle, eh?

I think I can agree that defense, so far, has been a stronger common denominator than QB play, though, but I also think it is really hard to build a #1 defense (and you need the right defensive mind to do it - 5 SBs are from Belichick and LeBeau combined, which make up 5 of the 7 elite SB winning defenses. I like Haslett, and he's better than Blache, but he's sure as hell no Dick LeBeau or Bill Belichick.

Agree on all points 100%

Also, I was wrong, the Patriots maintained that as well. But that's a tough act to follow, and asssuming Roethlisberger doesn't go to jail, they'll have both elite QBs and monster defenses for the next 5 years or more.

I think Roethlisberger is the most overated QB in the NFL actually. I think he is a game manager that relies on a great defense to win games. Early on he had a great running game, and now he has some real weapons at WR and TE that bail him out, but he holds the ball longer than Campbell does and makes some real bad decisions. Guy throws into triple coverage during crunch time and Santonio Holmes makes an amazing catch to bail him out. Even he said the first thing he though when he threw that ball was that he just threw an INT.

I think you are SERIOUSLY stretching it to assert that Brady could not have led this squad to better than 4 wins. Come on. That is simply ridiculous.

.

And that's without even addressing the implication that Campbell is anywhere near Brady as a player.

I didnt say that exactly, I said, with our coach, our FO and out players he wouldnt be much better. 2 years ago Matt Cassel went 10-6. Last year Tom Brady went 10-6. I dotn think anyone here thinks that Cassle is as good as Brady, but what it does show that coaching and playcalling means alot. What I was really getting at is that it's kinda hard to score points as a QB when the coachs takes the ball out of your hands when you get into scoring position. How many times did you see NE run the ball 3 times in a row in the RZ and then kick a FG? Granted I dont watch them play much, but I'm not sure if I ever saw them run the ball PERIOD down there. I think playcalling would seriously hamstring Brady in this senario and that was more of my point. Bad playcalling will affect how players perform. We had bad playcalling for most of the year, very bad, conservative, predictable playcalling.

Stat wise Campbell was much better in the RZ than Brady was last year. Same amount of td's, less INT's, better completions%, less sacks but didnt get near as many attempts as Brady. And Brady was really good last year.

[timboj126]

not the greatest QB, but will definitly put some pressure on Campbell this season. Will do fine with Okung anchoring the left side!

[Morneblade]

I like this signing considering campbell can make anyone look like a good qb. Campbell and grossman have a lot in common though, minus the playoff and super bowl experience that grossman has and campbell lacks

I'm thinking Grossman would like to forget that game. It was like watching the Keystone Cops.

[FrFan]

“We want competition,” Shanahan said. “And I think if you look at Rex’s background, you can see what he has done and how much experience he has. He’s obviously got a year into the system, but not a lot of playing time.

Competition from Wrecks ? I really do have a hard time figuring this out.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Gotcha. That shows 3 things, they draft well and they run a good scheme and execute it. And they dont over pay FA's either. The opposite of what we have done in the past

I think that if Shanahan pans out, we'll probably have the same level of "plug-and-play" capability on the offensive side, especially on the line and at QB. Once we actually get that franchise lineman, whether it's Okung or Bulaga or even a potential franchise guard like Iupati or center like Pouncy this year or someone else later, we can shuffle pieces around as long as they fit into the scheme. I think that even with Campbell we can be consistent playoff contenders, but I feel that if we take a blue-chip QB, we can potentially turn him into an Elway-like producer who can be a part of a team that's a threat to win it all every year.

I think Roethlisberger is the most overated QB in the NFL actually. I think he is a game manager that relies on a great defense to win games. Early on he had a great running game,

It was a very consistent running game, but it wasn't a DOMINANT one - they were 19th and 12th in both of his first years in the league in YPC, but they had by far the most attempts. Granted, the 2nd year is highly skewed by the fact that Bettis was getting all the goal line attempts; Willie Parker was great that year. Was top 10 in his 32 TD year, and 16th last year.

and now he has some real weapons at WR and TE that bail him out, but he holds the ball longer than Campbell does and makes some real bad decisions.

That is true, but he's one of those QBs, like Favre, that make some terrible decisions (as an aside, that throw in the NFC championship was imo the right one - if he gets 4 yards, and Longwell misses, the Saints only need to make one pass and they're in FG range. Remember that at the spot of the play, it was a 56-57 yard kick by an old kicker. At best, Favre throws a game-winner, at worst, it's a punt that they probably should have made no matter what.) but makes enough plays to compensate for it. Also, while Ward/Holmes/Miller is better than Moss/ARE/Cooley, how much better is it?

Guy throws into triple coverage during crunch time and Santonio Holmes makes an amazing catch to bail him out. Even he said the first thing he though when he threw that ball was that he just threw an INT.

It may have been a triple covered throw, but it was still an amazing throw that gave Holmes a great chance to catch it. Sometimes you have to make gutsy, risky throws to win the game.

Granted I dont watch them play much, but I'm not sure if I ever saw them run the ball PERIOD down there. I think playcalling would seriously hamstring Brady in this senario and that was more of my point.

I guess I would agree that Brady's production would be highly impacted.

Stat wise Campbell was much better in the RZ than Brady was last year. Same amount of td's, less INT's, better completions%, less sacks but didnt get near as many attempts as Brady. And Brady was really good last year.

Here's a question - why did our offensive line, which was terrible all year, NOT struggle in the red zone? Was it Campbell making better and quicker decisions? Or did the line just play better for some reason?

If you extrapolated his RZ production to his overall production, he's at least a top 10 QB. What changes for him when he gets inside the 20? It may be that, as said earlier, he's in a better comfort zone where he can utilize his short to intermediate game and not have to worry about going deep.

[crimetime21]

spent a few years ripping my friend cause of grossman and how stupid the bears are. well who's laughing now? this sucks.

[Morneblade]

I think that if Shanahan pans out, we'll probably have the same level of "plug-and-play" capability on the offensive side, especially on the line and at QB. Once we actually get that franchise lineman, whether it's Okung or Bulaga or even a potential franchise guard like Iupati or center like Pouncy this year or someone else later, we can shuffle pieces around as long as they fit into the scheme. I think that even with Campbell we can be consistent playoff contenders, but I feel that if we take a blue-chip QB, we can potentially turn him into an Elway-like producer who can be a part of a team that's a threat to win it all every year.

When Elways was winning SB's he was in the twilight of his career and was no longer the dominant offensive player. That would have been Terrell Davis. If we can seriously upgrade the OL the next couple of years and find a young RB, I think we'll be pretty good offensively. I like what we have at WR and TE. I also think JC can be a top 6-7 QB in the league with a good OL and playcalling. Top 5 probably not so much, but a guy that can be a real asset if he has some solid guys up front to go along with our newly professional coaching staff and play calling.

It was a very consistent running game, but it wasn't a DOMINANT one - they were 19th and 12th in both of his first years in the league in YPC, but they had by far the most attempts. Granted, the 2nd year is highly skewed by the fact that Bettis was getting all the goal line attempts; Willie Parker was great that year. Was top 10 in his 32 TD year, and 16th last year.

True, but Ben himself was a complete non-factor. His first year offensively they ran a ton (#1 in the league, #2 in yards) and of course they had a great defense. Passing O was 32nd in the league. Ben was asked to not loose games and protect the ball, which is what he did. Which is what you want from a rookie. Year 2 was basically the same. His 3rd year he was asked to do alot more and had a really sustandard year. More INTs than TD's, Comp % below 60 %. The next year(2007), he had a great year, but the team was 31st in attemps, so he was not shouldering the load. And they went 8-8. 08' was pretty ugly, only 2 more TD's then INTs and one again a comp% below 60 and they still won 12 games and a SB. Last year was his best year as a pro and the team goes 9-7 and misses the playoffs. He starts on a team that has won 2 SB's and that is the only reason people think he's great. When they guy's numbers are at their best, the team is 17-15 combined. When he isnt doing much, they win 2 SB's. So I dont think that much of him. He certainly doesnt raise the team with his play.

It may have been a triple covered throw, but it was still an amazing throw that gave Holmes a great chance to catch it. Sometimes you have to make gutsy, risky throws to win the game.

If you're got less the 10 seconds to go, ok. If you have 30-odd seconds and a time out, it's a bad move. A safer throw and you can still score and not have it likely picked off and loose the game. If a guy is triple covered, you KNOW you have someone else running wide open.

Here's a question - why did our offensive line, which was terrible all year, NOT struggle in the red zone? Was it Campbell making better and quicker decisions? Or did the line just play better for some reason?

If you extrapolated his RZ production to his overall production, he's at least a top 10 QB. What changes for him when he gets inside the 20? It may be that, as said earlier, he's in a better comfort zone where he can utilize his short to intermediate game and not have to worry about going deep.

I think that might be in in a nutshell. It's no secret we really couldnt run much 5-7 step drops due to protection issues. Down in the RZ, you dont need more than a 3 step drop and make plays. I think it also debunks one of the knocks on Campbell, that he cant make quick decisions. Everything is faster in the RZ and if he had trouble with that he should stuggle here, not excel. But he played his best. Outside the 20 he might have been less willing to try and stick the ball into coverage as well. I noticed that most of the time our WR's really didnt get much if any seperation. Zorn wanted him to be safe with that ball and he didnt take alot of chances. Around the End Zone I saw him stick the ball into close quarters more often and take more chances, throwing back across his body, throwing accross the field, ect. Not having wide open target he took the best avaliable. He was still safe with the ball. I think his mobility helped as well, as teams knew he was a threat to do damage if he broke containment.

But I'm just guessing as to why.

[MustangSteve]

rex has at least played some extremely good games in his career, and he'll be 10x funnier to watch than campbell. id rather be laughing than crying.