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

[Mahons21]

Like it or not, think whatever you want to think, Campbell was the quintessential leader yesterday for the Raiders. MVP of the game no question. If you believe otherwise, you did not watch the game. Period.

MVP of what? Handing the god damn ball off?

How is the QB an MVP in a game where the RB's are 42 carries for 192 yds and 2 TDs....

The impressive stats in this game are the Raiders rushing stats.

[No Excuses]

game set match. Bad QB when he has to carry the team.

[ATLredskin]

Can't understand how one man can hate on another man....

[Conn]

Can't understand how one man can hate on another man....

What do you mean?

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

Can't understand how one man can hate on another man....

You've obviously never had your gym shorts pulled down to your ankles from behind in 5th grade dodgeball with the girl you were sweet on stood open mouthed laughing in front of you.

Yes Benjamin White. I'm talking about YOU! I will catch up with you one day you ginger haire ..... wait, I'm recounting this aloud right? ****, pretend this never happened and all move on in a dignified manner.

Hail.

[ATLredskin]

that is different though...I don't feel liek explaining myself

[Conn]

that is different though...I don't feel liek explaining myself

Well, you should probably keep it to yourself, then. Instead of confusing all of us

[Califan007 The Constipated]

You've obviously never had your gym shorts pulled down to your ankles from behind in 5th grade dodgeball with the girl you were sweet on stood open mouthed laughing in front of you.

Yes Benjamin White. I'm talking about YOU! I will catch up with you one day you ginger haire ..... wait, I'm recounting this aloud right? ****, pretend this never happened and all move on in a dignified manner.

Hail.

LOL!! :rotflmao:

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

LOL!! :rotflmao:

Even if I'm laughing, your 'sposed to support your B&G brethren Cali, not laugh along at the memory darn it. ******! *Chuckling.

Hail.

[elkabong82]

game set match. Bad QB when he has to carry the team.

You're refuting a point NO ONE has made, and in an arrogant fashion. Kind of foolish IMO.

[luke1867]

MVP of what? Handing the god damn ball off?

How is the QB an MVP in a game where the RB's are 42 carries for 192 yds and 2 TDs....

The impressive stats in this game are the Raiders rushing stats.

For the one millionth time, He put the Raiders up 21-0 before the running game got going. Which Offensive coordinator wouldn't dial up a bunch of running plays to slow down a high octane Charger offense from coming back in that scenario? When the Chargers scored a TD to make the game 21-13, he came right back and threw a 38 yd bomb to the 2 yd line which set up Bush for the TD and effectively sealed the game for the Raiders 28-13. Bringing running stats which look impressive on paper but were chucked up when the Raiders were winning comfortably does not tell half the story and sells Campbell's performance short. He audibled on several plays, switched things up at the line of scrimmage and even chewed up Jacoby Ford on one play for lining up improperly. His coach came out after the game and said that was the best game Campbell had as a Raider. He was given the game ball after the game.You just don't know what you are talking about. It's obvious.

[Seabee1973]

For the one millionth time, He put the Raiders up 21-0 before the running game got going. Which Offensive coordinator wouldn't dial up a bunch of running plays to slow down a high octane Charger offense from coming back in that scenario? When the Chargers scored a TD to make the game 21-13, he came right back and threw a 38 yd bomb to the 2 yd line which set up Bush for the TD and effectively sealed the game for the Raiders 28-13. Bringing running stats which look impressive on paper but were chucked up when the Raiders were winning comfortably does not tell half the story and sells Campbell's performance short. He audibled on several plays, switched things up at the line of scrimmage and even chewed up Jacoby Ford on one play for lining up improperly. His coach came out after the game and said that was the best game Campbell had as a Raider. He was given the game ball after the game.You just don't know what you are talking about. It's obvious.

It is because people are looking into Stats Fantasy values instead of how to a the game plays out. I will admit he isnt a top notch qb but a game manager but he has looked good this season minus a few games. If the raiders draft well next years raiders team could be a strong playoff team

[Going Commando]

Touche. I still won't agree with the notion that Jason Campbell's rushing game open up the rushing game for McFadden/Bush.

And a strong rushing QB can also bring an extra man into the box.

That's still a good thing for an offense. It's never ideal to have a safety in box duty if you can help it. Then the passing game opens up since you can't bracket receivers and have to leave your corners on an island.

Having a QB who is a legit threat to gain yards on the ground is only a good thing for an offense--unless he can't pass.

[Mahons21]

That's still a good thing for an offense. It's never ideal to have a safety in box duty if you can help it. Then the passing game opens up since you can't bracket receivers and have to leave your corners on an island.

Having a QB who is a legit threat to gain yards on the ground is only a good thing for an offense--unless he can't pass.

I see what you're saying Steve, but Luke had made the assertion that Jason Campbell opened up the rushing attack through scrambles of his own.

---------- Post added December-7th-2010 at 11:27 AM ----------

For the one millionth time, He put the Raiders up 21-0 before the running game got going.

The Raiders RB's had 20 carries in the first half, 43 all game. The Raiders game plan IS TO RUN THE GOD DAMN BALL, it's been that way all season.

And for the millionth time, running the ball when you have a lead isn't easy, it's actually much more difficult. The defense knows what's coming.

Which Offensive coordinator wouldn't dial up a bunch of running plays to slow down a high octane Charger offense from coming back in that scenario?

A team that can't run the ball and would go 3 and out, giving the high-powerer SD offense the ball back... A team like the Washington Redskins. If running the ball to end the game was so easy the skins wouldn't have been so god damn atrocious for the past 3 years, because all we ever did was play conservative with a lead, and then we'd end up losing it.

When the Chargers scored a TD to make the game 21-13, he came right back and threw a 38 yd bomb to the 2 yd line which set up Bush for the TD and effectively sealed the game for the Raiders 28-13.

That was one play, the other 6 plays that got them there? All rushes by McFadden, and Bush. And it wasn't a 2 yd rush by Bush it was a 7 yd rush by McFadden that got them in the endzone on that drive.

Bringing running stats which look impressive on paper but were chucked up when the Raiders were winning comfortably does not tell half the story and sells Campbell's performance short.

For the millionth time, rushing the ball with a lead is not EASIER, and he Raiders were rushing the ball all god damn game.

He audibled on several plays, switched things up at the line of scrimmage

So now he can do what 75% of the QB's in the NFL can do..

. His coach came out after the game and said that was the best game Campbell had as a Raider. He was given the game ball after the game.You just don't know what you are talking about. It's obvious.

Link to press conference/article please.

You're right I have no idea what I'm talking about... I just happen to think that the Raiders are a rushing team, the 42 RB attempts doesn't prove my point at all, because hey they had a lead when they were running... I've always been taught it's much easier to run the ball when you have a lead... Get a ****ing clue..

As I've said the entire time in this post, Jason Campbell didn't play a bad game nor did he play a good game.

Maybe this will shed some light for you. I've broken down the Raiders performance drive by drive, acknowledging the score prior to the drive. Finding the % of plays that were rushing plays to their RBs.

If what you believe is true, than the team would have an increase in rushing % on the drive as their lead grew larger. Outside of the final drive of the game with 2 minutes left, and 20 rushing yds gained, this was not the case.

Drive 1: 0-0

66%

Drive 2: 0-0

25%

Drive 3: 7-0

63%

Drive 4: 14-0

50%

Drive 5: 21-3

66%

Drive 6: 21-3

Kneel

Drive 7: 21-3

60%

Drive 8: 21-3

60%

Drive 9: 21-6

40%

Drive 10: 21-13

71%

Drive 11: 28-13

100%, game ending drive.

But like you said, I clearly know nothing, and the Raiders ONLY ran the ball because they had a lead.

[Passizle]

Actually it is what he said, look at his post 562 above he reaffirmed it.

That makes no sense. The raiders are a rushing team no matter what, they're going to try and rush the ball. Your logic as follows is that, they were able to rush the ball later in the game because they had a lead... You realize that it's this point in the game where rushing the ball becomes the most difficult, because the defense knows what you're trying to do.

---------- Post added December-6th-2010 at 01:35 PM ----------

I don't care about those stupid BS stats. A Qb can open up the rushing attack by throwing bombs down field and bringing men out of the box, a QB CANNOT open up the rushing attack by rushing the ball themselves, this actually brings more people into the box. Furthermore rushing the ball when you have the lead isn't something easy to do, nor is it ideal for a RB. The defense knows what's coming and they stack the box, the fact that the Raiders are still able to run the ball in such situations is a testament to their rushing attack, not Jason Campbell.

The more you post, the more I realize you nothing about football strategy. I think our QB leads the league in big pass plays (40+), if not, then he is definitley top 10. That has done nothing for our run game. In fact, our run game is TERRIBLE. I also think you missed the point completely. JC did not "open" up the run game, he lead it in the first half, to the tune of 21 points. Thats a fact. At the end of the first half, JC led the team in rushing. After Oak have a good lead, they leaned on the run game to chew up clock time and played really good defense. They dictated the game by making SD one dimensional while they were trying to play "catchup". That is a direct result of going up 21-3. The fact that you dont seem to know this perplexes me.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

As I've said the entire time in this post, Jason Campbell didn't play a bad game nor did he play a good game.

That's just it, though...he DID play a good game. So far it seems most of the people unwilling to say JC played a good game are those who didn't actually see the game, and are instead trying to use game stats to prove their point.

[Mahons21]

The more you post, the more I realize you nothing about football strategy. I think our QB leads the league in big pass plays (40+), if not, then he is definitley top 10.

Did I say that the deep ball automatically makes your rushing attack work? Donovan McNabb has always been top 5 in the league in throws of 40+, but never had any descent rushing game, obviously Andy Reid's play calling has a lot to do with it.

However having a strong deep ball most certainly helps the rushing attack, its football 101.

That has done nothing for our run game. In fact, our run game is TERRIBLE.

That's because you need an o-line/rb to have a running game, it takes more than a QB who can throw the deep ball. I don't know how you inferred from my post that if you have a QB who can throw the ball deep than you will have a good rushing attack.

I also think you missed the point completely. JC did not "open" up the run game, he lead it in the first half, to the tune of 21 points.

Maybe you missed the point completely. I was arguing with someone who said the only reason the rushing attack was able to get going was because of Campbell.

He was the leading rushing in the 1st half. That also had nothing to do with why the Raiders ran the ball so much. They run the ball this much every game.

And the muffed punt, and the INT had nothing to do with those points?

Thats a fact. At the end of the first half, JC led the team in rushing. After Oak have a good lead, they leaned on the run game to chew up clock time and played really good defense.

Maybe you should read my posts 2 posts up, the one where it shows the percentage of rushing plays per drive. You'll see that this little fantasy you conjured up in your head to give Campbell as much credit as possible is actually false.

You might notice two of their highest rushing percentage drives, came when their lead was only 7 and 8 points(their smallest leads of the entire game), in comparison with other drives that where they had a 14 point lead, yet one of the lowest rushing %'s for the drive.

They dictated the game by making SD one dimensional while they were trying to play "catchup". That is a direct result of going up 21-3. The fact that you dont seem to know this perplexes me.

As a team yes they did, I haven't said they didn't. That fact that you believe I said this perplexes me. Just like last time you claim I said something I didn't, I challenge you to find where I said anything remotely close to what you just asserted. If you don't.. then stop speaking for me, it's growing quite irritating.

The difference is, I'm not ready to give Campbell all the credit for these points.

---------- Post added December-8th-2010 at 10:20 AM ----------

That's just it, though...he DID play a good game. So far it seems most of the people unwilling to say JC played a good game are those who didn't actually see the game, and are instead trying to use game stats to prove their point.

As I've said before Califan, this game was aired in Redskins territory this week, so the large majority of us including myself were able to watch it. And the reason stats became involved in my debate, was because the poster I was debating not you/passizle who kindly jumped in, puts a lot of faith in them.

From what I saw Campbell didn't make any mistakes. I also him make a play or two, ie the Michael Bush impromptu shovel pass, as well as the Louis Murphy pa bomb, and hell even the roll-out TD. But when compared to other QB's around the league who have twice as much impact on the outcome of a game, I just can't say he played that well. Though he certainly did not play poorly.

If that's a good game for a QB, how would you categorize Tom Brady's game? or Aaron Rodgers?

In Rodgers last 3 games, his stat line averages out to:

314 pypg, 3 tds, 130 pr, 72% comp, 37 rypg and oh ya 0 INTs

[tr1]

If that's a good game for a QB, how would you categorize Tom Brady's game? or Aaron Rodgers?

Name one poster in this entire thread who said JC is in the class of a Brady or Rodgers? :rotflmao:

Keep putting up the straw-man arguments...because you're losing the real debate.

Too funny. :rotflmao:

JC's career qb rating is about 80...not great, but not nearly as bad as some would have us think.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

As I've said before Califan, this game was aired in Redskins territory this week, so the large majority of us including myself were able to watch it. And the reason stats became involved in my debate, was because the poster I was debating not you/passizle who kindly jumped in, puts a lot of faith in them.

From what I saw Campbell didn't make any mistakes. I also him make a play or two, ie the Michael Bush impromptu shovel pass, as well as the Louis Murphy pa bomb, and hell even the roll-out TD. But when compared to other QB's around the league who have twice as much impact on the outcome of a game, I just can't say he played that well. Though he certainly did not play poorly.

If that's a good game for a QB, how would you categorize Tom Brady's game? or Aaron Rodgers?

I don't think it matters that the game was shown on TV on the east coast lol...you can tell by many of the responses that a lot of people didn't watch the game, or only occasionally tuned in to see what was happening. You can't get an accurate reading of Campbell's play that way.

I think this speaks to a problem I feel a lot of football fans (or a lot of ES members lol) have: they feel the only "good" QB performances are the ones that are dominating...300+ yards, 3+ TDs, carry a struggling team on their backs, 50 yard TD passes, come-from-behind TD drives in the last 2 minutes, ESPN highlight types of games. Everything else is deemed mediocre/average or poor.

I think that Campbell played a better game than Peyton Manning did this past weekend. He not only made essential plays at absolutely important times that kept TD scoring drives alive but he played smarter. The Raiders have the type of offense that, if they get far enough ahead, they don't need the QB to do anything anymore lol...Peyton Manning, however, had better stats outside of the INTs and definitely had more "highlight"-worthy passes. But in my mind that never is enough to warrant praise...that's something fantasy football cares about.

An example: during the Raiders game there was one point in which Campbell took off on a 12 yard scramble on 2nd-and-9, and ran out of bounds. It was a decisive run--meaning, it was made quickly and without hesitation--and got them a 1st down, keeping the Raiders out of 3rd and long. Compare that to McNabb's hesitant 3-yard run that resulted in a fumble...DM hesitantly ran towards the LOS, and with a good amount of open field in front of him hesitated yet again before finally deciding to run for the 1st down. He only got about 3-4 yards and couldn't run out of bounds because he waited so long, and instead tried to awkwardly slide instead, which resulted in the fumble.

In my eyes, a QB who is decisive and makes the right decisions at the right times and keeps drives alive with heads-up play, he definitely gets points for good play...when they are doing so regularly throughout the game and have a definite role in a win instead of just "going along for the ride", then I easily say they played a good game. That describes Campbell this past weekend.

I also give him props for his improvisations and for his extremely well-executed play action...Patrick Ramsey SUCKED at selling play action lol...didn't matter how well the running game was working, nobody ever bit on it. Peyton Manning is a master at selling the play action...doesn't matter how poorly the running game is doing, he'll still get defenses biting on a supposed running play. This past weekend JC looked like Peyton's clone in that regard...and his ball handling skills on play action directly lead to 14 of the Raiders' points: the 1st TD of the game on 4th down where he severely faked out the entire Chargers defense...the San Diego defender who was supposed to contain Campbell wasn't even LOOKING at Campbell on that TD run lol...if JC doesn't sell that play action he very well could have been sacked and the Raiders end up with zero points after going deep into Charger territory.

The 38 yarder on 3rd down was right after the Chargers scored and were within 8 points with plenty of time on the clock...they had scored on their previous two possessions and had the momentum turning their way--at home. Remember how many times the Skins let teams back into the game because we kept going 3-and-out after building a lead? Remember all the times where the Skins had to rely solely on the defense to win the game because the offense couldn't score anymore points after halftime?...Didn't happen with the Raiders, and it was because Jason Campbell expertly sold the play action when it was desperately needed and got the Raiders down to the Chargers' 10 yard line. Two plays later they're running into the end zone for a TD. That score doesn't happen without Campbell.

His performance deserved praise.

---------- Post added December-8th-2010 at 08:01 AM ----------

In Rodgers last 3 games, his stat line averages out to:

314 pypg, 3 tds, 130 pr, 72% comp, 37 rypg and oh ya 0 INTs

Who cares what Rodgers' stat line averages out to be over the last three games? lol ...

We're talking about whether or not Campbell's performance in the Raiders' last game should be seen as him playing well or not.

There's a reason we call some QBs "elite"...that doesn't mean that any QB who is not considered elite is incapable of having a praise-worthy game.

[Mahons21]

Name one poster in this entire thread who said JC is in the class of a Brady or Rodgers? :rotflmao:

Keep putting up the straw-man arguments...because you're losing the real debate.

Too funny. :rotflmao:

JC's career qb rating is about 80...not great, but not nearly as bad as some would have us think.

So then you're admitting you have a different grading scale for NFL QBs... I don't.

[tr1]

So then you're admitting you have a different grading scale for NFL QBs... I don't.

Congrats...

Enjoy the highlights in losing efforts. The pukes have a high scoring offense, but they never succeed in the playoffs.

Is that what you want?

I just want a guy who wins...regardless of his stats.

That's my NFL grading scale.

[Mahons21]

I don't think it matters that the game was shown on TV on the east coast lol...you can tell by many of the responses that a lot of people didn't watch the game, or only occasionally tuned in to see what was happening. You can't get an accurate reading of Campbell's play that way.

As I've said throughout the thread I watched the large majority of it, until the Cowboys/Colts got exciting.

I

think this speaks to a problem I feel a lot of football fans (or a lot of ES members lol) have: they feel the only "good" QB performances are the ones that are dominating...300+ yards, 3+ TDs, carry a struggling team on their backs, 50 yard TD passes, come-from-behind TD drives in the last 2 minutes, ESPN highlight types of games. Everything else is deemed mediocre/average or poor.

As human beings we judge almost everything in comparison with something else. That girl that wouldn't be so pretty on a Friday night, looks pretty good when the bars dead on a Tuesday and there's not another girl in sight.

So when there's QB's in the league that are truly dominating, they set a standard of what it is to be a good QB in the NFL.

I think that Campbell played a better game than Peyton Manning did this past weekend. He not only made essential plays at absolutely important times that kept TD scoring drives alive but he played smarter. The Raiders have the type of offense that, if they get far enough ahead, they don't need the QB to do anything anymore lol...Peyton Manning, however, had better stats outside of the INTs and definitely had more "highlight"-worthy passes. But in my mind that never is enough to warrant praise...that's something fantasy football cares about.

He did play a better game, but that's because Peyton threw 4 INT's, that's not some small stat.

An example: during the Raiders game there was one point in which Campbell took off on a 12 yard scramble on 2nd-and-9, and ran out of bounds. It was a decisive run--meaning, it was made quickly and without hesitation--and got them a 1st down, keeping the Raiders out of 3rd and long. Compare that to McNabb's hesitant 3-yard run that resulted in a fumble...DM hesitantly ran towards the LOS, and with a good amount of open field in front of him hesitated yet again before finally deciding to run for the 1st down. He only got about 3-4 yards and couldn't run out of bounds because he waited so long, and instead tried to awkwardly slide instead, which resulted in the fumble.

Please never mention that McNabb play again, and that's a good play for Campbell. The problem is it's routine for someone like Rodgers.

In my eyes, a QB who is decisive and makes the right decisions at the right times and keeps drives alive with heads-up play, he definitely gets points for good play...when they are doing so regularly throughout the game and have a definite role in a win instead of just "going along for the ride", then I easily say they played a good game. That describes Campbell this past weekend.

I'm by no means saying he had no roll in the win. The debate I was currently in, I was arguing against a poster who claimed Jason Campbell's rushing attack opened up the Raiders rushing attack.

But other QB's in the NFL played a much larger roll in their wins, wouldn't you agree?

I also give him props for his improvisations and for his extremely well-executed play action...Patrick Ramsey SUCKED at selling play action lol...didn't matter how well the running game was working, nobody ever bit on it. Peyton Manning is a master at selling the play action...doesn't matter how poorly the running game is doing, he'll still get defenses biting on a supposed running play. This past weekend JC looked like Peyton's clone in that regard...and his ball handling skills on play action directly lead to 14 of the Raiders' points: the 1st TD of the game on 4th down where he severely faked out the entire Chargers defense...the San Diego defender who was supposed to contain Campbell wasn't even LOOKING at Campbell on that TD run lol...if JC doesn't sell that play action he very well could have been sacked and the Raiders end up with zero points after going deep into Charger territory.

I think you're giving too much credit to Jason Campbell's play fake on this play, and not enough credit to the season the Raiders RB's have been having. That OLB did get sold by the PA, but I would argue that the player was so focused on stop the Raiders RBs that have been doing what they want, that he didn't even think about the PA roll-out. He wasn't just fooled, he was caught out of position standing still.

The 38 yarder on 3rd down was right after the Chargers scored and were within 8 points with plenty of time on the clock...they had scored on their previous two possessions and had the momentum turning their way--at home. Remember how many times the Skins let teams back into the game because we kept going 3-and-out after building a lead? Remember all the times where the Skins had to rely solely on the defense to win the game because the offense couldn't score anymore points after halftime?...Didn't happen with the Raiders, and it was because Jason Campbell expertly sold the play action when it was desperately needed and got the Raiders down to the Chargers' 10 yard line. Two plays later they're running into the end zone for a TD. That score doesn't happen without Campbell.

If you remember that drive so vividly, clearly you remember that was the sole passing play on the drive. In addition, there's no way to prove that they wouldn't have scored without that play. It was 3rd and 1, they just as easily could have ran the ball for the first. And if my memory serves me right, they weren't exactly that far out of FG range, another rush or two, they would have been right there, and it still would have been a 2 score game with a FG.

Not saying it wasn't a nice play by Campbell, but claiming Campbell is the sole reason they scored on a drive in which he passed the ball once and handed it off every other time, is a little bit silly in my opinion.

His performance deserved praise.

---------- Post added December-8th-2010 at 08:01 AM ----------

Who cares what Rodgers' stat line averages out to be over the last three games? lol ...

We're talking about whether or not Campbell's performance in the Raiders' last game should be seen as him playing well or not.

There's a reason we call some QBs "elite"...that doesn't mean that any QB who is not considered elite is incapable of having a praise-worthy game.

---------- Post added December-8th-2010 at 11:26 AM ----------

Who cares what Rodgers' stat line averages out to be over the last three games? lol ...

We're talking about whether or not Campbell's performance in the Raiders' last game should be seen as him playing well or not.

There's a reason we call some QBs "elite"...that doesn't mean that any QB who is not considered elite is incapable of having a praise-worthy game.

You need comparisons to set a standard for what good play is.

I never said Campbell's performance wasn't worth of praise. But there's a standard for NFL QB's now and his play is still rather mediocre.

Hypothetically. Would you say a RB that has 12 rushes 55 yards, had a good game? Probably not, because there's guys like Peyton Hillis, and Arian Foster who are going nuts every weekend. Doesn't mean the hypothetical RB did nothing worthy of praise, but when compared to those RB's we consider good in the NFL his performance would not stack up.

---------- Post added December-8th-2010 at 11:28 AM ----------

Congrats...

Enjoy the highlights in losing efforts. The pukes have a high scoring offense, but they never succeed in the playoffs.

Is that what you want?

Please point to where I said that.... thanks.

I just want a guy who wins...regardless of his stats.

That's my NFL grading scale.

I just want a team that wins, regardless of their stats. That doesn't mean I can't grade QB's, nor that a grade A qb is necessary to win.

[Passizle]

Did I say that the deep ball automatically makes your rushing attack work? Donovan McNabb has always been top 5 in the league in throws of 40+, but never had any descent rushing game, obviously Andy Reid's play calling has a lot to do with it.

However having a strong deep ball most certainly helps the rushing attack, its football 101.

That's because you need an o-line/rb to have a running game, it takes more than a QB who can throw the deep ball. I don't know how you inferred from my post that if you have a QB who can throw the ball deep than you will have a good rushing attack.

Maybe you missed the point completely. I was arguing with someone who said the only reason the rushing attack was able to get going was because of Campbell.

He was the leading rushing in the 1st half. That also had nothing to do with why the Raiders ran the ball so much. They run the ball this much every game.

And the muffed punt, and the INT had nothing to do with those points?

Maybe you should read my posts 2 posts up, the one where it shows the percentage of rushing plays per drive. You'll see that this little fantasy you conjured up in your head to give Campbell as much credit as possible is actually false.

You might notice two of their highest rushing percentage drives, came when their lead was only 7 and 8 points(their smallest leads of the entire game), in comparison with other drives that where they had a 14 point lead, yet one of the lowest rushing %'s for the drive.

As a team yes they did, I haven't said they didn't. That fact that you believe I said this perplexes me. Just like last time you claim I said something I didn't, I challenge you to find where I said anything remotely close to what you just asserted. If you don't.. then stop speaking for me, it's growing quite irritating.

The difference is, I'm not ready to give Campbell all the credit for these points.

---------- Post added December-8th-2010 at 10:20 AM ----------

As I've said before Califan, this game was aired in Redskins territory this week, so the large majority of us including myself were able to watch it. And the reason stats became involved in my debate, was because the poster I was debating not you/passizle who kindly jumped in, puts a lot of faith in them.

From what I saw Campbell didn't make any mistakes. I also him make a play or two, ie the Michael Bush impromptu shovel pass, as well as the Louis Murphy pa bomb, and hell even the roll-out TD. But when compared to other QB's around the league who have twice as much impact on the outcome of a game, I just can't say he played that well. Though he certainly did not play poorly.

If that's a good game for a QB, how would you categorize Tom Brady's game? or Aaron Rodgers?

In Rodgers last 3 games, his stat line averages out to:

314 pypg, 3 tds, 130 pr, 72% comp, 37 rypg and oh ya 0 INTs

My apologies about the mistake. I did not read the prior pages to see what the prior poster suggested. I went on past behavior on your part and thats my mistake.

Where did you get your running % numnbers?

[Mahons21]

My apologies about the mistake. I did not read the prior pages to see what the prior poster suggested. I went on past behavior on your part and thats my mistake.

No worries, I'd say 100% of the posters on this board are guilty of the same crime at one time or another.

Where did you get your running % numnbers?

nfl.com, went to scores, analysis, then the play by play breakdown. Counted total # of plays not including punts/penalties, than counted how many were rushes by RBs, and how many plays were rushes/passes by Campbell.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

As I've said throughout the thread I watched the large majority of it, until the Cowboys/Colts got exciting.

Well, that's nice lol...but as you mentioned earlier in response to my comment, since the game was played on the east coast there probably were a lot of people who saw the game and still didn't think Campbell deserved praise. I just pointed out that you can easily tell that a lot of people did NOT watch the game by the comments they made in their posts. The fact that you may have watched the game doesn't change that fact.

As human beings we judge almost everything in comparison with something else. That girl that wouldn't be so pretty on a Friday night, looks pretty good when the bars dead on a Tuesday and there's not another girl in sight.

No, not really. If I see an attractive female at the mall I don't immediately try to judge her in comparison to every other female I've ever seen at that same mall over the last 12 months lol...I either think she's pretty or I do not.

And it's incredibly easy to judge whether or not a player had a good game without needing to judge it against all other QBs playing that same weekend. The only time comparisons are needed is when deciding on if a QB should be considered elite or HOF-worthy...things like that. But as for whether or not a QB had a good game?...If you are the type who needs to FIRST look at the other QBs in the league that same weekend before determining if a QB had a good game or not, then something's wrong. I guarantee you coaches and coordinators don't view players in that manner lol...

So when there's QB's in the league that are truly dominating, they set a standard of what it is to be a good QB in the NFL.

No, they set the standard of what is considered "elite" in the NFL...If no QB in the league is considered "dominating", then it will be said that there are no truly elite QBs in the NFL. They don't grade on a curve lol ...

He did play a better game, but that's because Peyton threw 4 INT's, that's not some small stat.

It's not just the INTs, though, it's the decision-making throughout the game. INTs can come from WRs running the wrong route, tipped balls or just incredible DB play, and not due directly to anything the QB did wrong.

Please never mention that McNabb play again, and that's a good play for Campbell. The problem is it's routine for someone like Rodgers.

Why is that a problem? lol ...the debate isn't whether or not Campbell should be considered an elite QB based on the Raiders game. Again, who cares if Rodgers does it more consistently than Campbell?

I'm by no means saying he had no roll in the win. The debate I was currently in, I was arguing against a poster who claimed Jason Campbell's rushing attack opened up the Raiders rushing attack.

But you went a step or two further by claiming Campbell's performance shouldn't even be considered good. That's what I commented on. I don't care about the other aspects you just mentioned.

But other QB's in the NFL played a much larger roll in their wins, wouldn't you agree?

So? lol ...Once again, it has zero to do with what we're discussing, because what we're discussing is NOT that JC played the biggest role of any QB in their team's win this past weekend. We're discussing whether or not JC's performance should be seen as a good one. And for the record, there HAVE been those on this thread who have claimed Campbell's contribution to the Raiders' win was little more than "handing off the football" for 60 minutes lol...

I think you're giving too much credit to Jason Campbell's play fake on this play, and not enough credit to the season the Raiders RB's have been having. That OLB did get sold by the PA, but I would argue that the player was so focused on stop the Raiders RBs that have been doing what they want, that he didn't even think about the PA roll-out. He wasn't just fooled, he was caught out of position standing still.

You DO realize, of course, that the Raiders' RBs had done squat up to that point in the game, right?...and you DO realize, of course, that the player who should have contained Campbell was standing straight up, looking into the pile to see what happened while the guy he was responsible for kept running right past him, right? And you DO realize, of course, that even an average PA attempt by a QB in that situation would at least get that same defender at the very least chasing after him, but this guy just stood there frozen, right?

It's why I mentioned Patrick Ramsey...Ramsey would have been sacked if it were him. He couldn't sell **** to anyone, he couldn't fake out any defense that severely. The Chargers' defender would have hesitated a split second, then ran after Ramsey immediately. The type of frozen defense you saw there was NOT simply due to some defense-wide fear of the Raiders' RBs. The Chargers had a top-5 rushing defense at the time (I think it might have been #3 in the league)...they weren't running scared out there at ANYONE's running backs. That PA was just a beautifully executed play by Campbell and the RB. I give him all the credit in the world for selling it as well as he did.

If you remember that drive so vividly, clearly you remember that was the sole passing play on the drive.

And that means...??? lol...Now, if you said it was the only completed pass of the drive after several off-target throws, you MIGHT have a point. If you said they almost sacked JC because he didn't sell the PA all that well, you MIGHT have a point.

In addition, there's no way to prove that they wouldn't have scored without that play. It was 3rd and 1, they just as easily could have ran the ball for the first. And if my memory serves me right, they weren't exactly that far out of FG range, another rush or two, they would have been right there, and it still would have been a 2 score game with a FG.

Not saying it wasn't a nice play by Campbell, but claiming Campbell is the sole reason they scored on a drive in which he passed the ball once and handed it off every other time, is a little bit silly in my opinion.

That's weak lol...My point was that Campbell's role in the Raiders' scoring a TD on that drive was THE most significant aspect of that drive--a 40-yard completion to the 10-yard line on 3rd down after faking out the defense, the crowd, the announcer and the camera man. He set them up perfectly to put a lot more distance in between his team and the momentum-building Chargers. He's the reason they scored on that drive.

Now...are there a multitude of scenarios that we could conjure up that show the Raiders scoring a TD on that drive if Campbell misses that throw or doesn't even attempt it? Sure lol ...But you could say that about every single TD pass thrown by Rodgers, Brady and Brees. I somehow doubt, though, that we'd be just as willing to call it "silly" to claim that those QBs were the reason those TDs were scored.

His performance deserved praise.

Campbell's performance deserved praise but it wasn't "good"? lol...

You need comparisons to set a standard for what good play is.

So how exactly were we able to come up with the first determination of good QB play?

I never said Campbell's performance wasn't worth of praise. But there's a standard for NFL QB's now and his play is still rather mediocre.

So you praise mediocre play? lol...

Hypothetically. Would you say a RB that has 12 rushes 55 yards, had a good game? Probably not, because there's guys like Peyton Hillis, and Arian Foster who are going nuts every weekend. Doesn't mean the hypothetical RB did nothing worthy of praise, but when compared to those RB's we consider good in the NFL his performance would not stack up.

If the RB ran in an impressive TD from the 8 yard line, threw another TD on an option play, regularly picked up blitzing LBs to give his QB more time to make a play downfield, and picked up important 1st downs on 3rd-and-short late in the game to keep the opposing offense off the field?...Then, yes, I'd say he played a good game, definitely.

If I didn't watch the game and just looked at his stats on NFL.com, I might not.