Rocky21 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=0&season=2011&seasonType=REG&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&statisticCategory=PASSING&conference=null&d-447263-s=PASSING_PASSER_RATING Mike Vick 11th Jason Campbell 12th Donovan McNabb 17th Rex Grossman 23rd Discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santana_4_prez Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 The key part of your post was "through 3 weeks". And besides, who cares? Live in the now. Not trying to be a ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins Wingman Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 are u trying to say you would rather have campbell back? just based on numbers? if so, thats dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingGibbs Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Translation: Let's discuss how Jason Campbell is or isn't a good QB and see if it will be the same stuff that has been argued over and over and over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annonymous Source Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 There isnt anything to discuss. The consensus on Campbell was that he could be an effective passer if the running game was going and he had time in the pocket. Those are two things he is getting plenty of in Oakland. If you had really wanted to stir up some stuff you should have mentioned Jay Cutler and Kyle Orton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecardiacrll Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Dude Jason Campbell's QB rating is good because there running game is blowing up and he's not the focal part of the offense. There barely throwing the ball in Oakland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrypticVillain Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 ESPN's Total QBR backs him up even more Campbell: 67.5 (9th) Grossman: 47.5 (18th) McNabb: 42.8 (22nd) Bradford: 33.7 (25th) But you know what??? It still doesn't matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Look at total yards. Rex Grossman #12 Bradford #20 Jason Campbell #25 McNabb #30 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 These numbers don't say much. Of the four guys: McNabb/Campbell are the best comparisons to each other. Except, most of Campbell's receiving weapons are hurt. They both have outstanding run games. Campbell is doing his 1/11th. McNabb is not. Bradford is young, still, in a new offensive system run by Josh McDaniels and his OL/receivers are not in the least bit good. On top of that, Steven Jackson has been injured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pimpey42000 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 ESPN's Total QBR backs him up even moreCampbell: 67.5 (9th) Grossman: 47.5 (18th) McNabb: 42.8 (22nd) Bradford: 33.7 (25th) But you know what??? It still doesn't matter This looks more like career completion percentage.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FanboyOf91 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Look at total yards.Rex Grossman #12 Bradford #20 Jason Campbell #25 McNabb #30 Vick: 201.7 y/g Campbell: 194.7 y/g Dream Team! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrypticVillain Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 This looks more like career completion percentage.... McNabb wishes his completion percentage was that good...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#98QBKiller Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Translation: Let's discuss how Jason Campbell is or isn't a good QB and see if it will be the same stuff that has been argued over and over and over again. Pretty much...let's post these stats through 16 weeks and see what they look like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Dude Jason Campbell's QB rating is good because there running game is blowing up and he's not the focal part of the offense. There barely throwing the ball in Oakland. ESPN's Total QBR backs him up even moreCampbell: 67.5 (9th) Grossman: 47.5 (18th) McNabb: 42.8 (22nd) Bradford: 33.7 (25th) But you know what??? It still doesn't matter Passing:J. Campbell105, vs. Broncos Passing:J. Campbell323, vs. Bills Passing:J. Campbell156, vs. Jets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrypticVillain Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Passing:J. Campbell105, vs. BroncosPassing:J. Campbell323, vs. Bills Passing:J. Campbell156, vs. Jets Based on those stats, if Campbell passes under 200 yards, the Raiders win...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busch1724 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Look at total yards.Rex Grossman #12 Bradford #20 Jason Campbell #25 McNabb #30 Total yards are overrated. The Oakland offense isn't making mistakes...period. They are playing mistake free football and Campbell is part of that equation. ---------- Post added September-30th-2011 at 10:24 AM ---------- Based on those stats, if Campbell passes under 200 yards, the Raiders win...... That means they ran the ball well, controlled the clock, and didn't give up a ton of points. The game they lost to Buffalo was not Campbell's fault. With that said, Campbell does have his faults, but out of the 4 listed here it's between him or Grossman. Bradford is learning a new offense so mistakes are liekly to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrypticVillain Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Total yards are overrated. The Oakland offense isn't making mistakes...period. They are playing mistake free football and Campbell is part of that equation.---------- Post added September-30th-2011 at 10:24 AM ---------- That means they ran the ball well, controlled the clock, and didn't give up a ton of points. The game they lost to Buffalo was not Campbell's fault. With that said, Campbell does have his faults, but out of the 4 listed here it's between him or Grossman. Bradford is learning a new offense so mistakes are liekly to happen. I would have elaborated on my post about the Raiders being the number one rushing team, but I knew people would get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 I really wish they would start handing out NNTs for anyone who starts a thread with Campbell. This is getting old and is already worn out. He's gone, we have another QB. Deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirClintonPortis Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Understand that all QBR stats focus on measuring PERFORMANCE, not capability. Campbell has been performing well as the Raider offense has not been hindered by him, but a watch of the tv tape shows that he is a very, very flawed quarterback. His sideline throws are all doomed to going out bounds. He has subtle lack of awareness, as he had an intentional grounding when he easily could have escaped the tackle box. He is not a fit for this offense. Campbell's pass EPA last week was 2.9. That's quite pathetic, but a few penalties by Cromartie, a nice block, a couple good passes, and he got a 60 TQBR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Campbell's pass EPA last week was 2.9. That's quite pathetic, but a few penalties by Cromartie, a nice block, a couple good passes, and he got a 60 TQBR. If a few penalties, a nice block and two good passes is all it takes to get a high TQBR rating, then it's even more worthless than the original QB rating system ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passizle Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 And here I thought the Campbell discussion would have died already... LOL. He is what he is. A smart QB who does not make many mistakes. He is decent, but not a game changer. Grossman otoh is a game changer. He changes wins to losses. All kidding aside. I dont like Grossman under center. He looks a bit lost out there and was definitley flustered in the Boys game. The one thing that bothered me most were his scrambles. He did not keep his eyes downfield, pumpfake, lookoff or anything... what was worse was that he was looking behind himslef to see how close the defender was. That was really bad to watch. A guy with his experience in the NFL should have a clock in his head on when to let it fly. He has looked "off" since week one. He makes me nervous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffro Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Two Words: Darren McFadden With a running threat like that, you definitly should be putting up those numbers in the throwing game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirClintonPortis Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 If a few penalties, a nice block and two good passes is all it takes to get a high TQBR rating, then it's even more worthless than the original QB rating system ... 60.1 is not that good if we're just looking at one game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unforgiven Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Yeah, he can thank McFadden and the running game for that. With that running attack all he has to do is be a game manager, which suits him just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DisgruntledLionFan#54,927 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 I like the idea of their QBR rating, but I need someone to explain some of these weekly ratings for me. I just don't understand how Orton could have had a better day than Stafford last week. Also, I don't understand how they can clarify which plays are clutch yet can't decipher which sacks are the fault of the QB, OL or a combination of both. These are their respective stat lines: 62% Comp%, 173 yards, 4.4 YPA, 2 TDs, 2 INTs = 66.2 QBR 70% Comp%, 378 yards, 8.2 YPA, 2 TDs, 0 INTs = 58.1 QBR I'm all ears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.