PFT:: Gradkowski, Campbell conundrum could spark a locker-room rift (MET)

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

a lot of hate for a guy who is leading a team that's undefeated in their division and who was the scapegoat for a team that now has that elusive "franchise" quarterback who can't do a damn thing.

all i heard from guys like BLC was campbell sucks, he can't win, career backup. bring in a real qb and he'll make everyone look better. guess what, mcnabb looks like **** and so does the skins offense.

so what's your excuse now?

weve already won more games with mcnabb by week 12 than campbell did by week 17. and its not ALL on the QB, the QB is not a one man show, he needs other pieces around him. the QB is still the most important aspect, but he cant do it alone. our oline is still crap, our receivers are still underachievers, and we have an even bigger carousel of RBs this season than we did last year, not to mention an even bigger carousel at OL this season. and mcnabb is playing much better than campbell did last year, regardless of any stats you'd like to throw at me, not to mention the leadership he brings to our offense that campbell never could.

and our coaching staff and new front office agreed with me and shipped campbell out pretty quickly for very little return. its a process to build this team up and mcnabb is a guy that can play well for us. obviously he played poorly today but thats gonna happen. but anyone thinking oakland is playing well because of jason campbell is just a campbell fan deluding themselves further. oaklands run game is 99% the reason for their success this season.

[tiger187126]

weve already won more games with mcnabb by week 12 than campbell did by week 17. and its not ALL on the QB, the QB is not a one man show, he needs other pieces around him. the QB is still the most important aspect, but he cant do it alone. our oline is still crap, our receivers are still underachievers, and we have an even bigger carousel of RBs this season than we did last year, not to mention an even bigger carousel at OL this season. and mcnabb is playing much better than campbell did last year, regardless of any stats you'd like to throw at me, not to mention the leadership he brings to our offense that campbell never could.

and our coaching staff and new front office agreed with me and shipped campbell out pretty quickly for very little return. its a process to build this team up and mcnabb is a guy that can play well for us. obviously he played poorly today but thats gonna happen. but anyone thinking oakland is playing well because of jason campbell is just a campbell fan deluding themselves further. oaklands run game is 99% the reason for their success this season.

do you hold grudges like this outside of campbell? or was he really the one that stole your girlfriend?

it's obvious you didn't watch the oakland game, and yet you speak about intangibles. you don't follow the raiders, and yet you pretend to know anything about their success.

you're just being lazy about this BLC. we get it you hate campbell, but don't pretend like mcnabb is miles ahead of campbell. most sane people understood when we traded for him what we were getting, and if they didn't they got 12 weeks of it this season to figure it out.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

do you hold grudges like this outside of campbell? or was he really the one that stole your girlfriend?

it's obvious you didn't watch the oakland game, and yet you speak about intangibles. you don't follow the raiders, and yet you pretend to know anything about their success.

you're just being lazy about this BLC. we get it you hate campbell, but don't pretend like mcnabb is miles ahead of campbell. most sane people understood when we traded for him what we were getting, and if they didn't they got 12 weeks of it this season to figure it out.

i watched the oakland game actually. he completed 10 passes.

youre completely out of your mind if you think hes a factor in their success. he merely hands off to guys, and completes play action passes due to the fact that teams are downright terrified of allowing mcfadden or bush to kill them. did you see his bootleg TD? teams are so scared of their RBs that no one even bothered to look at him. you'd score a TD on that play lol.

[tiger187126]

i watched the oakland game actually. he completed 10 passes.

youre completely out of your mind if you think hes a factor in their success. he merely hands off to guys, and completes play action passes due to the fact that teams are downright terrified of allowing mcfadden or bush to kill them. did you see his bootleg TD? teams are so scared of their RBs that no one even bothered to look at him. you'd score a TD on that play lol.

In 2 games vs. SD, QB JASON CAMPBELL has completed 41 of 60 passes (68.3 pct.) for 440 yards w/ 3 TDs vs. 0 INTs & 106.3 rating

you're right though, those third down scrambles, escaping from pressure, making plays with his legs and arm, they all mean nothing.

the only way to judge a QB is on his W/L record. wasn't that your JC excuse when he put up good numbers?

6-2, that's what the raiders are when JC plays the majority of the game for them.

[Passizle]

congrats to campbell on the big win today. he was a major factor in the win throwing 10 completed passes. dont let anyone tell you that oaklands 250 rushing yards were the main reason. no no, big JC8 was the man today.

but again, campbell performs ok when oaklands run game is out of its mind. today was another example of the hard truth: campbell can only perform when the run game is completely dominating.

Actually, Campbell did well before the run game started up. Check the stats. They were not doing much on the ground when JC scored the first two TD's. Once SD backed off (due in part to th success of the passing game) the run game exploded. Dont kid yourself. you did not see the game. I did. The numbers dont show what JC did today. He commanded the huddle. Got guys lined up. Read defenses, and audibled into succesful 3rd down conversions. And he made KEY plays with his feet, and arm. There was a fantastic play where he was all but crushed, but avoided the sack... he was chased and tossed a shovel pass to Bush before hitting the dirt and getting knocked out for a play. Bush took it for a good gain and 1st down. JC kept that team in the game for sure. You would not know it by the numbers, but anyone who actually saw the game would see where the win stemmed from.

---------- Post added December-6th-2010 at 12:23 AM ----------

What stats?

Candle was underwhelming today even when the run game racked up around 200 yds.

Skins OL improvement I'd disagree with you. TW is the man, but did you see who else was our LT today? Jamaal Brown would be an upgrade, but he still isn't healthy. And our 3 interior OL have gotten worse. Though maybe we can put something inside that's better next year with Lich, Dock, Monty, and BMW.

Candle put up almost decent stats with us, when a career backup came in 2007 and put up great stats. Said career backup beat Candle again in 2009, despite "the anointed one" getting all the starter reps and attention from his personal trainer / head coach. Just think if we had somebody like McNabb back then.... 2006-2009 in what we should call "the wasted years".

Candle doesn't "have" the Raiders doing anything. He's riding the coat tails of a good running game, just like he did with us first half of 2008. Remember what happened the last game before today, that Candle started?

You did not see the game. Its obvious.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

the best play campbell had was a broken pitch play where he got decked and pitched the ball to bush (i think) for a big gain.

guys, theres a reason that the job was given right back to gradkowski once he healed up. if gradkowski wasnt hurt campbell would still be riding the pine.

and i watched most of the game flipping back between redzone. i saw once nice bomb and his broken pitch, and a million handoffs to mcfadden/bush. he completed 10 passes. i dont know how you can call that anything other than game managing, which everyone has agreed that he can do if the run game works.

its how he succeeded in college, its how he got his 6-2 start here, and its how he has success in oakland. its clear as day.

passizle i feel no need to argue with you, you already admitted last week you're glad we have mcnabb you just dont like the picks given up. thats a fine stance IMO.

[Passizle]

i watched the oakland game actually. he completed 10 passes.

youre completely out of your mind if you think hes a factor in their success. he merely hands off to guys, and completes play action passes due to the fact that teams are downright terrified of allowing mcfadden or bush to kill them. did you see his bootleg TD? teams are so scared of their RBs that no one even bothered to look at him. you'd score a TD on that play lol.

You are either lying about seeing the game, or you are being disingenious about why the Raiders won. I said before, it was not all about JC. But he DID do some VERY good things at KEY times to keep drives alive. A talent that our current QB seems to lack.

JC numbers were not pretty, and if you did not see the game, and just googled the stat-line, I could see why you would come to the conclusion that JC rode a good run game to a win.

BTW... if you did see the game, and it is how you said it was, then why were the commentators glowing over JC's play? They mentioned it quite a bit during the game. In fact, all they talked about was the improvment of the O-line and JC play.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

You are either lying about seeing the game, or you are being disingenious about why the Raiders won. I said before, it was not all about JC. But he DID do some VERY good things at KEY times to keep drives alive. A talent that our current QB seems to lack.

JC numbers were not pretty, and if you did not see the game, and just googled the stat-line, I could see why you would come to the conclusion that JC rode a good run game to a win.

BTW... if you did see the game, and it is how you said it was, then why were the commentators glowing over JC's play? They mentioned it quite a bit during the game. In fact, all they talked about was the improvment of the O-line and JC play.

the gushing i heard was about how good his playfakes were, and he was always fine at playfakes. again, as ive said a million times, he lives on playaction. its why gibbs drafted him, he is a playaction, deep pass guy (he just doesnt throw deep consistently).

with that run game he can play to his strengths. when the run game goes away, hes awful. this isnt even arguable at this point, theres so much evidence that supports this notion its stupid to even go over it again. he'll continue to do fine in oakland as long as they keep rushing for 180+ a game. but IMO, so would almost any QB.

[tiger187126]

the best play campbell had was a broken pitch play where he got decked and pitched the ball to bush (i think) for a big gain.

guys, theres a reason that the job was given right back to gradkowski once he healed up. if gradkowski wasnt hurt campbell would still be riding the pine.

and i watched most of the game flipping back between redzone. i saw once nice bomb and his broken pitch, and a million handoffs to mcfadden/bush. he completed 10 passes. i dont know how you can call that anything other than game managing, which everyone has agreed that he can do if the run game works.

its how he succeeded in college, its how he got his 6-2 start here, and its how he has success in oakland. its clear as day.

passizle i feel no need to argue with you, you already admitted last week you're glad we have mcnabb you just dont like the picks given up. thats a fine stance IMO.

so it's JC's fault that they wanted to run the air out of the ball after he lead two td drives?

then how exactly do you explain us winning with mcnabb's turnovers and low completion percentage?

wait, i see. i read about this. i think it's called a double standard!

you've adjusted your thought proccess and now have found a way to use the same excuses you ripped JC supporters for using on mcnabb.

now suddenly it is the oline, wrs, rbs, coach, oc, at a plethora of other things. but not with JC, he had a super bowl team here and just held them down.

i wouldn't even come around these threads BLC. your flip-flopping on the requirements to be a good qb could make a politician blush.

[Passizle]

the gushing i heard was about how good his playfakes were, and he was always fine at playfakes. again, as ive said a million times, he lives on playaction. its why gibbs drafted him, he is a playaction, deep pass guy (he just doesnt throw deep consistently).

with that run game he can play to his strengths. when the run game goes away, hes awful. this isnt even arguable at this point, theres so much evidence that supports this notion its stupid to even go over it again. he'll continue to do fine in oakland as long as they keep rushing for 180+ a game. but IMO, so would almost any QB.

I guess what bothers me about your opinion, is that you play it as a weakness in JC's game. What about MCNabb? He has no run game and he sucks... you were a huge proponent of making a QB switch would fix this, as defense would respect the passing game. I knew your logic was flawed then, and it still is now. Therre are not many QB's that can thrive w/ out a good run game. Whit your POV, Im am guesing that there are not many QB's out there that will be to your liking. Unless we have Brady, or Manning that is. many other QB that have success (Ryan, Flacco, Big Ben, E. Manning, Romo sits to pee, etc) all have had good to great running games when they were successful and good protection. Its all I hammered about during JC's tenure here. Its what we really needed... not a "stud" QB who gets killed with no run support or time to throw. Glad to see your coming around...

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

so it's JC's fault that they wanted to run the air out of the ball after he lead two td drives?

then how exactly do you explain us winning with mcnabb's turnovers and low completion percentage?

wait, i see. i read about this. i think it's called a double standard!

you've adjusted your thought proccess and now have found a way to use the same excuses you ripped JC supporters for using on mcnabb.

now suddenly it is the oline, wrs, rbs, coach, oc, at a plethora of other things. but not with JC, he had a super bowl team here and just held them down.

i wouldn't even come around these threads BLC. your flip-flopping on the requirements to be a good qb could make a politician blush.

i didnt like JC cause he checked down all day, turned the ball over in critical situations, had a dreadful deep ball, and took WAY too many sacks. mcnabb is much better at all of these. its why shanahan and allen went out and got him and why campbell wasnt retained.

its also pretty simple. if campbell is good which you clearly think, why didnt our staff and front office retain him? why let a good player go for next to nothing (a 2012 2nd day draft pick)?

and its not a double standard at all, mcnabb just gets a little more leeway from me because hes only played 12 games with this group (not the 52 campbell got) and because of everything hes accomplished in this league up until this point.

mcnabb aint playing well right now, but ive seen enough to warrant giving him more time here. if hes still playing like this next season by week 12, please see how my posting style will change on him.

---------- Post added December-6th-2010 at 12:47 AM ----------

I guess what bothers me about your opinion, is that you play it as a weakness in JC's game. What about MCNabb? He has no run game and he sucks... you were a huge proponent of making a QB switch would fix this, as defense would respect the passing game. I knew your logic was flawed then, and it still is now. Therre are not many QB's that can thrive w/ out a good run game. Whit your POV, Im am guesing that there are not many QB's out there that will be to your liking. Unless we have Brady, or Manning that is. many other QB that have success (Ryan, Flacco, Big Ben, E. Manning, Romo sits to pee, etc) all have had good to great running games when they were successful.

actually some of the lanes are there for our runners, but instead of portis and betts, two guys that knew what they were doing, we have williams and davis who are relatively clueless rookies with some raw ability. ive seen some massive lanes open up that guys dont hit, and i bet its driving our staff up the wall right now.

and mcnabbs had some pretty awesome games without a running game, which is why im willing to give him some more time to pan out. the houston game was awesome, the packers game was awesome, his game in tennessee was awesome, those big 350+ games where he bombs it multiple times is why i like mcnabb. JC could never do that.

my biggest complaint with mcnabb is the lack of TDs, and i blame that on him and our skill players who cant turn their huge gains into TDs. i think at one point he and rivers led all QBs in pass plays of 40+ yards, and mcnabb had 0 TDs out of that: thats unacceptable and not on mcnabb.

[Passizle]

i didnt like JC cause he checked down all day, turned the ball over in critical situations, had a dreadful deep ball, and took WAY too many sacks. mcnabb is much better at all of these. its why shanahan and allen went out and got him and why campbell wasnt retained.

its also pretty simple. if campbell is good which you clearly think, why didnt our staff and front office retain him? why let a good player go for next to nothing (a 2012 2nd day draft pick)?

and its not a double standard at all, mcnabb just gets a little more leeway from me because hes only played 12 games with this group (not the 52 campbell got) and because of everything hes accomplished in this league up until this point.

mcnabb aint playing well right now, but ive seen enough to warrant giving him more time here. if hes still playing like this next season by week 12, please see how my posting style will change on him.

---------- Post added December-6th-2010 at 12:47 AM ----------

actually some of the lanes are there for our runners, but instead of portis and betts, two guys that knew what they were doing, we have williams and davis who are relatively clueless rookies with some raw ability. ive seen some massive lanes open up that guys dont hit, and i bet its driving our staff up the wall right now.

and mcnabbs had some pretty awesome games without a running game, which is why im willing to give him some more time to pan out. the houston game was awesome, the packers game was awesome, his game in tennessee was awesome, those big 350+ games where he bombs it multiple times is why i like mcnabb. JC could never do that.

my biggest complaint with mcnabb is the lack of TDs, and i blame that on him and our skill players who cant turn their huge gains into TDs. i think at one point he and rivers led all QBs in pass plays of 40+ yards, and mcnabb had 0 TDs out of that: thats unacceptable and not on mcnabb.

If McNabb was better at avoiding sacks, and making plays out of nothing, you would expect him to have less total sacks on the year (he does not).

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

If McNabb was better at avoiding sacks, and making plays out of nothing, you would expect him to have less total sacks on the year (he does not).

our oline still blows.

and i put some of the sacks on kyle shanahan which is another debate all together. why mcnabb is behind center on 3rd and long against some of these teams is beyond me, and it makes it much easier for guys to kill mcnabb. at least zorn put campbell in shotgun more often.

[tiger187126]

i didnt like JC cause he checked down all day, turned the ball over in critical situations, had a dreadful deep ball, and took WAY too many sacks. mcnabb is much better at all of these. its why shanahan and allen went out and got him and why campbell wasnt retained.

its also pretty simple. if campbell is good which you clearly think, why didnt our staff and front office retain him? why let a good player go for next to nothing (a 2012 2nd day draft pick)?

and its not a double standard at all, mcnabb just gets a little more leeway from me because hes only played 12 games with this group (not the 52 campbell got) and because of everything hes accomplished in this league up until this point.

mcnabb aint playing well right now, but ive seen enough to warrant giving him more time here. if hes still playing like this next season by week 12, please see how my posting style will change on him.

REALLY?

that's what you give me?

checks down too much, turns the ball over in critical situations, bad deep ball, and WAY too many sacks?!

mcnabb checks down like crazy, hell he made a living off of it in philly all those years. it's what he does, except he had brian westbrook. watch a redskins game and see open guys down field as mcnabb checks that ball down.

mcnabb had two terrible turnovers in this game alone, whiping out any chance of anything. and this isn't the first time. what's he up to now? 14 ints? i'm sure those were all hail mary's and didn't affect the game at all.

mcnabb leads the league in 50+ yard completions. none of them have gone for scores. mcnabb's deep ball isn't something to write home about.

mcnabb is tied for 3rd in the nfl in sacks taken.

again, it absolutely is a double standard. go ahead, justify those same things in mcnabb's favor.

---------- Post added December-6th-2010 at 12:55 AM ----------

our oline still blows.

and i put some of the sacks on kyle shanahan which is another debate all together. why mcnabb is behind center on 3rd and long against some of these teams is beyond me, and it makes it much easier for guys to kill mcnabb. at least zorn put campbell in shotgun more often.

so now we've arrived at zorn being a better play caller than kyle.

the guy who had the top ranked passing offense in the nfl knows less than the failed HC who had to go back to being a QB coach.

it's just pathetic BLC.

oh and btw, dropping back from center helps a qb read what the defense is doing while he makes his drop. he doesn't have to make a quick decision, he gets to watch the play unfold. you don't always get that luxury in the shotgun.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

REALLY?

that's what you give me?

checks down too much, turns the ball over in critical situations, bad deep ball, and WAY too many sacks?!

mcnabb checks down like crazy, hell he made a living off of it in philly all those years. it's what he does, except he had brian westbrook. watch a redskins game and see open guys down field as mcnabb checks that ball down.

mcnabb had two terrible turnovers in this game alone, whiping out any chance of anything. and this isn't the first time. what's he up to now? 14 ints? i'm sure those were all hail mary's and didn't affect the game at all.

mcnabb leads the league in 50+ yard completions. none of them have gone for scores. mcnabb's deep ball isn't something to write home about.

mcnabb is tied for 3rd in the nfl in sacks taken.

again, it absolutely is a double standard. go ahead, justify those same things in mcnabb's favor.

mcnabb leads the league in huge pass plays but he checks down all the time? you do realize how stupid that sounds right?

he still has an incredible deep ball that can alter a game at any given moment. and a lot of his picks have come on the last drive in desperation time. todays last pick was so meaningless an unnecessary it was just funny. he had one in the packers game, meaningless. he had one in the rams game down by 16 with like 30 seconds, game was over already.

if you cant see with your own eyes that mcnabb is good at avoiding the rush then i cant help you. avoiding the rush is one thing, avoiding 4 guys on a jailbreak is another lol.

its clear youre a big campbell homer and thats fine, i hope youre enjoying the raiders cute little run right now.

my only joy in life right now is that the nats signed jayson werth lol.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Three of the top 4 threads in the ATN forum right now are about Jason Campbell lol ...

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

Three of the top 4 threads in the ATN forum right now are about Jason Campbell lol ...

Boyz will be boyz Cali man.

Hail.

[tiger187126]

mcnabb leads the league in huge pass plays but he checks down all the time? you do realize how stupid that sounds right?

he still has an incredible deep ball that can alter a game at any given moment. and a lot of his picks have come on the last drive in desperation time. todays last pick was so meaningless an unnecessary it was just funny. he had one in the packers game, meaningless. he had one in the rams game down by 16 with like 30 seconds, game was over already.

if you cant see with your own eyes that mcnabb is good at avoiding the rush then i cant help you. avoiding the rush is one thing, avoiding 4 guys on a jailbreak is another lol.

its clear youre a big campbell homer and thats fine, i hope youre enjoying the raiders cute little run right now.

my only joy in life right now is that the nats signed jayson werth lol.

and now you're supporting a snyder-esque move by the nats to overpay the crap out of a guy.

honestly i'm not nearly as much a campbell homer as you are a campbell hater.

i never pretended JC was a world beater, but i did contend that we shouldn't trade away more draft picks for mcnabb.

see all that lack of talent that you point out as you make excuse after excuse for mcnabb comes from deals like ours to get him.

we never spent anything to put talent around JC. we kept the same line, same wrs, same rbs.

so while you rack your brain for more scapegoats to take the fall for mcnabb having a **** season (even though it's starting to look like the norm for him), how about you takes some time to realize that a "franchise" qb might not be the end all be all you've always pretended it would be.

---------- Post added December-6th-2010 at 01:03 AM ----------

Three of the top 4 threads in the ATN forum right now are about Jason Campbell lol ...

6-2 as the qb of the raiders.

i'll never understand all the hate.

i think people just pinned him to the wall for all the disappointment of the decade plus.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

and now you're supporting a snyder-esque move by the nats to overpay the crap out of a guy.

honestly i'm not nearly as much a campbell homer as you are a campbell hater.

i never pretended JC was a world beater, but i did contend that we shouldn't trade away more draft picks for mcnabb.

see all that lack of talent that you point out as you make excuse after excuse for mcnabb comes from deals like ours to get him.

we never spent anything to put talent around JC. we kept the same line, same wrs, same rbs.

so while you rack your brain for more scapegoats to take the fall for mcnabb having a **** season (even though it's starting to look like the norm for him), how about you takes some time to realize that a "franchise" qb might not be the end all be all you've always pretended it would be.

not to derail one of one thousand JC threads, but the werth move is a great one. his OPS was out of this world, we need sticks in the lineup, and he got a big contract for playing well. the only reason the nats had to overpay slightly was because the nats are still building and its tough to get guys to come here (if you remember the texieria situation). werth/zimmerman and hopefully either pena or laroche sounds good to me (although getting grienke sounds better!). and nothing about the nats is snyderesche. all the nats do is build the farm system, trade vets for kids, and promote from within. signing one guy to a big contract is hardly snyder esche.

we got a 4th for campbell, we traded a 2nd and 3rd for mcnabb. essentially we lost a 2nd, and 30 spots in a middle round. for a guy that has a great track record, and is better than campbell is (which most people, and hopefully you, would agree on), thats not a big trade off.

mcnabb is still a very good QB. and he is worth putting some talent around. campbell was not, which is why he was let go for peanuts.

and lets be honest here in the big picture, mcnabb aint the long term solution either, we still need a young QB in the next 1-2 years. im hoping we take one in the 2012 draft, and get 3 years out of mcnabb while we build the team up. mcnabb aint winning us a superbowl, but he should be keeping us competitive. and up until the philly game he was. that philly game really deflated this team IMO.

[elkabong82]

So what's wrong with a good game manager QB? Oakland needs a QB who can actually survive a whole season behind their OL. So what good is Gradkowski when he gets banged up and misses a bunch of games each season?

Plus, are the Raiders really better with Gradkowski? The Raiders have lost just 3 games in which Cambell has posted stats. All 3 games JC didn't post stats/DNP, Oakland lost. Gradkowski had just 7 attempts in the first win against SD, with just 1 completion for 14 yards, so he wasn't a factor there. The other 5 games he's played he's had at least 20 attempts, and Oakland has won just 1 of those games.

The Raiders have found a way to win with a strong running game and solid game-management from Campbell, and the Raiders now have a QB who can actually last a full season. I'm not seeing what's so objectionable here, unless of course you posted for the past few years that Campbell is the worst in the NFL, in which case most would now opt to either stay silent, admit they were overexaggerating, or stay in denial and continue the exaggerations.

---------- Post added December-6th-2010 at 01:09 AM ----------

You are either lying about seeing the game, or you are being disingenious about why the Raiders won.

It wouldn't be the first time he's commented on a game without actually seeing it. Heck, he's even admitted he doesn't read the whole posts of people he replies to, rather he comments on what he assumes they said.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

lol, im glad to see elk is still holding on to his cute "i dont read peoples posts" comments. thatll be the last time i skim through one of his essays!

cant remember anyone ever saying he was the worst in the NFL either, but hey while were talking about exaggerations.

hes a poor QB thats leaning on a ridiculous running game right now. its why gradkowski still had the starting job over him a week ago until he got injured. campbell is definitely better at taking massive blows from defenders tho, hes awesome at that for sure.

so in summary, the raiders will continue to win games when they rush for 250 yards. and when the run game is stuffed, youll get his boxscore that he put up against the steelers and 49ers. its bed time now.

[tiger187126]

not to derail one of one thousand JC threads, but the werth move is a great one. his OPS was out of this world, we need sticks in the lineup, and he got a big contract for playing well. the only reason the nats had to overpay slightly was because the nats are still building and its tough to get guys to come here (if you remember the texieria situation). werth/zimmerman and hopefully either pena or laroche sounds good to me (although getting grienke sounds better!). and nothing about the nats is snyderesche. all the nats do is build the farm system, trade vets for kids, and promote from within. signing one guy to a big contract is hardly snyder esche.

we got a 4th for campbell, we traded a 2nd and 3rd for mcnabb. essentially we lost a 2nd, and 30 spots in a middle round. for a guy that has a great track record, and is better than campbell is (which most people, and hopefully you, would agree on), thats not a big trade off.

mcnabb is still a very good QB. and he is worth putting some talent around. campbell was not, which is why he was let go for peanuts.

and lets be honest here in the big picture, mcnabb aint the long term solution either, we still need a young QB in the next 1-2 years. im hoping we take one in the 2012 draft, and get 3 years out of mcnabb while we build the team up. mcnabb aint winning us a superbowl, but he should be keeping us competitive. and up until the philly game he was. that philly game really deflated this team IMO.

the orioles should have gunned for texeria more, i didn't even know the nats were in the running. this move is a pure PR, "hey look we won't be cheap, we promise! buy tickets!" move.

and btw, did mcnabb keep us competitive or did our defense? because the only games we've won we've scored less than 20 points. there were also those defensive scores, and multi turnover games. but i digress, it's all mcnabb, that's why we're headed to a meaningless 6-10 record.

i still want to know what the difference between 4-12 and 6-10 is and why it's ok to give up two starting player caliber draft picks to get to it.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

the orioles should have gunned for texeria more, i didn't even know the nats were in the running. this move is a pure PR, "hey look we won't be cheap, we promise! buy tickets!" move.

and btw, did mcnabb keep us competitive or did our defense? because the only games we've won we've scored less than 20 points. there were also those defensive scores, and multi turnover games. but i digress, it's all mcnabb, that's why we're headed to a meaningless 6-10 record.

i still want to know what the difference between 4-12 and 6-10 is and why it's ok to give up two starting player caliber draft picks to get to it.

i dont think it was a PR move. we need bats after losing dunn, werth is a very good hitter and a top RF. defense is a major problem, and a middle order bat was a major problem, we just solved both. and we can always trade him for something if were still dying in 2-3 years.

the difference is we're 6-10 this year, and we hope to be 10-6 next year because mcnabb can get us there. whereas with campbell we just continue to lose as we did throughout his entire tenure. its simple tho man, why was he let go? shanahan and allen got him wrong?

youre also not even acknowledging that kyle/mike run a pass heavy offense, something campbell failed at here under zorn and saunders. hes doing better because hes back to doing what he was best at: handing the ball off and keeping the pressure off his shoulders. kyle is probably looking for the next matt schaub type guy to mimic the texans offense which is always top flight.

and about the draft picks, we gave up one 2nd rounder and swapped and 3rd for a 4th. is that really a huge trade off?

and i think mcnabb has kept us competitive in numerous games. texans game was all him. packers game was mostly him. hell even the eagles game where all he did was hand off he made some nice plays to keep us alive. colts game we went back and forth and our D just couldnt get a stop or turnover. tenneessee he played well. and hes still a short term future move as well. if they can get two good years out of him (11 and 12) i bet theyll take it while they build everything else up.

[tiger187126]

lol, im glad to see elk is still holding on to his cute "i dont read peoples posts" comments. thatll be the last time i skim through one of his essays!

cant remember anyone ever saying he was the worst in the NFL either, but hey while were talking about exaggerations.

hes a poor QB thats leaning on a ridiculous running game right now. its why gradkowski still had the starting job over him a week ago until he got injured. campbell is definitely better at taking massive blows from defenders tho, hes awesome at that for sure.

so in summary, the raiders will continue to win games when they rush for 250 yards. and when the run game is stuffed, youll get his boxscore that he put up against the steelers and 49ers. its bed time now.

why don't you throw up grad's box score from the steelers game too? oh wait, that might not be a fair comparison for some reason.

JC plays, they win. Grad plays, they lose. so does the running game shut down when grads in? are do they change their lineup?

Grad beats st. louis by behind 173 yards of rushing. loses to AZ behind 133 yards. loses to houston behind 118 yards. loses to the dolphins behind 16 yards.

JC loses to tenn behind 136 yards. beats SD behind 111 yards. loses to SF behind 110 yards. beats Denver behind 328 yards. beats seattle behind 239 yards. beats KC behind 112 yards. beats SD behind 251 yards.

what i fail to understand is, if JC is such a slouch at the qb position and they don't have any weapons then why not stack up and stop the run?

here's another one: why would your qb throw a ton and in a game in which you run the ball extremely well?

and here's a stat box for you to check out, JC vs. seattle.

[elkabong82]

lol, im glad to see elk is still holding on to his cute "i dont read peoples posts" comments. thatll be the last time i skim through one of his essays!

cant remember anyone ever saying he was the worst in the NFL either, but hey while were talking about exaggerations.

hes a poor QB thats leaning on a ridiculous running game right now. its why gradkowski still had the starting job over him a week ago until he got injured. campbell is definitely better at taking massive blows from defenders tho, hes awesome at that for sure.

so in summary, the raiders will continue to win games when they rush for 250 yards. and when the run game is stuffed, youll get his boxscore that he put up against the steelers and 49ers. its bed time now.

Actually, like I said, I saw your comments posted by another, and since I haven't commented in here in awhile, and since you seem to be lying about actually watching the Raiders game, and since you're using a double standard for McNabb, I felt like replying. Unlike you, though, I haven't been obsessively posting in this forum, so I felt a couple posts today would be fine.

I see you're still pulling your annoying disengenuousness with this topic. You yourself have said he's one of the worst in the NFL, and you've said you could only think of 3 or so QBs who are worse. I'll re-word it as "one of the worst", and I was talking about starting QBs obviously.

"Skim my essay." lol, thanks for verifying again that you don't read a whole post before commenting on it, much like you don;t watch a game before commenting on it.

Gradkowski's injury history is a significant factor, as much as you want to downplay it. What good is a QB who can't play a complete season? And good job ignoring the Raiders W-L record with Campbell vs. Gradkowski. But go ahead and take those wins away from Campbell, tho you certainly will attribute the W-L column to Campbell when it's a loss (because you're dishonest in the JC debate).

I never said Campbell could win games on his own. The Raiders were losing games with Gradkowski where their run game was doing well, so there goes your theory about any QB being able to do well with a solid run game, or Campbell having nothing to do with the wins.

If anyone had said the Raiders would contend for the division title with JC as their QB, you would have laughed your head off and dismissed them as loons. But now that it's actually happened, the opposite of what you said would occur, you are doing everything you can to take credit away from Campbell, much like you did when he was QB here. Yeah, go get some rest, and give your tired spew in here a rest while you're at it.

As far as McNabb is concerned, he's still the better QB, IMO, and Campbell would be doing worse/not as good on this Skins team than McNabb, IMO.