The Griffin Touch

[gibbsfan]

no line 100 oc on offense and he was running for his life alot of his time here..

[Irn-Bru]

100 oc

I think you mean three offensive coordinators . . . and only two in the years he was starting. Plus, Saunders didn't change things too much from Gibbs, and Gibbs kept control of a large part of the offense during Campbell's first year starting.

I'm sorry but this is a professional league and at some point you have to be able to make minor adjustments. He didn't have that many schemes to deal with, and it's really not an excuse.

no line [...] on offense and he was running for his life alot of his time here..

[markshark84]

At one point I felt as if there were only 2 people (myself and RayinAustin) on this cite that actually understood how BAD JC really was and how much he was setting back this franchise. Kazoo, I even recall early on a couple (not a ton but a couple) pro-JC posts from you too.....

Absolutely, you remember correctly. I wanted to give the guy a chance. There were some who just jumped on him right away, and I didn't think that was right. And they held him to the standard of a #1 pick and he was late first round. I argued he should get every reasonable chance. But as time went on and he was clearly not progressing I became more and more critical. At that point I felt he'd had every reasonable chance.

Personally I think that's a good thing, giving him a chance, then making a decision once the preponderance of evidence is in. Not that you said otherwise.

Yes. I am of the opinion that you will ultimately know fairly quickly if a QB is going to be successful. I trust people understand that now that we have a good QB. Sure, there are QBs who are not immediately successful, but those are typically guys who sat behind someone and then came in and were very good (i.e., Rodgers, Steve Young) or guys that were asked to do too much and carry the load to early (like Peyton was in his first year). There are others that didn't produce because they didn't have anyone around them --- BUT BUT BUT this is only in pretty EXTREME cases (I actually can't think of one off the top of my head, but I'm sure there are a couple) and even with those QBs, they would still put up solid passing numbers (sort of like Brady in his early years when he literally had the worst WR core in the NFL).

BUT with JC, I knew within 3 games that he wasn't the guy. I won't get into everything but I personally though it was blatently obvious that he wasn't going to be successful (which is why I was so vocal about it on this cite). Personally, when you have a solid running game and you still can't throw -- you know your QB isn't good enough. I think that is one of the reasons I loved CP so much -- because if I were CP, I would have constantly been all over JC; like after every game. If CP had an even mediocre QB, he could have put up hall of fame stats -- but instead defenses stacked an 8-man box 90% of the time and he worked for every inch.

While I do agree that you need to give a guy a chance ---- the fact we literally handed him the franchise for close to 4 YEARS was depressing. IMHO, you know within a year MAX if your QB is "the guy". We should have cut line on JC in 2007. He set our franchise back 3 years.

[KazooSkinsFan]

Yes. I am of the opinion that you will ultimately know fairly quickly if a QB is going to be successful

That is completely not supported by history. Actually the majority of starting QB's take years to develop and are not clearly good until they learn the position. The prodigy's like Griffin are in fact the rare ones.

[KazooSkinsFan]

Campbell was and is good enough to be a QB in the NFL .. THAT is ALL

He's not good enough to be a starter and he never will be for one reason, he does not think at NFL speed. You said NFL QB, and I won't reject backup, but he'll never be an able starter for that reason.

[KazooSkinsFan]

Iunno, maybe I'm just a Jason homer.

The O-line argument while being a valid issue isn't a defense of Jason because he played the same way whether he got time or not. He repeatedly drilled the ball into the ground in front of open receivers and held the ball too long whether it was a long or short period of time. His play improved zero when he had more time.

[markshark84]

Just wanted to say how sweet it is to have a QB who just throws it to receivers over and over. After the years of Jason drilling it into the ground in front of receivers and the Rex lollipops, wow. And for all you who kept arguing that Jason drilling into the ground made sense because only the receiver could catch it, though actually the receiver couldn't, I have two things to say:

1) The receiver can only catch it if you throw it in their bread basket too, and it's a lot more effective

2)

Another great thing about Giffin over both as well is his ability to make quick decisions. Like the goal line play where he turned around and a d-lineman was zeroing in and he underhand threw it straight to the back. And don't forget that he gets rid of the ball when there's nothing there and he's under pressure. He's the best QB we've had since back in the day. Not even for a rookie, he's already the best.

The JC excuse-making on this cite was unreal for close to 3 years.

At one point I felt as if there were only 2 people (myself and RayinAustin) on this cite that actually understood how BAD JC really was and how much he was setting back this franchise. Kazoo, I even recall early on a couple (not a ton but a couple) pro-JC posts from you too.....

But we are seeing what good QB play looks like now -- a QB that can actually make plays and doesn't need an all-pro at every position to look adequate. As I have said: a QB makes everyone around them look better -- it's not the other way around.

Why pick on Campbell. RG3 makes almost anyone look bad by comparison. We're not getting good play out of him; we're getting great play. Take back a couple of idiot unsportsmanlike conduct call and we're 5-1, not 3-3. Give us an adequate defense and we're 6-0 and headed for the playoffs, maybe the super bowl. We're averaging 30 points a game, for Gawd's sake, without our best receiver and a mediocre OL.

I pick on JC because he is THE perfect example of how important the QB position is and how dumb our FO was for sticking with him for so long. NEVER AGAIN.

I agree with you in that RGIII is playing GREAT; although I think that your 5-1 assessment is based on a good deal of "what ifs" and based on literally every single thing going the skins way in each scenario....
- The STL unsportsmanlike would have given us THE CHANCE of a FG TO TIE and with Cundiff, that 42 yarder was 50-50 AT BEST. On top of that, if STL had won the OT coin toss, they would have most likely scored and won in OT. Honestly, STL played a better game.
- As far as the CIN game, we have no clue whether we would have scored -- in fact the odds were grossly against us. We were on CINCY's 39 yard line with 7 seconds to go BEFORE the unsportsmanlike. So saying that we "should have won that game" is literally just insane. We were OUTPLAYED by Cincy. We shouldn't have won that game.

The fact is that you are only as good as your record. If you think your record doesn't reflect you talents or team --- win more games. Right now we are 3-3 -- regardless of how you may want to justify it.

[markshark84]

Yes. I am of the opinion that you will ultimately know fairly quickly if a QB is going to be successful

That is completely not supported by history. Actually the majority of starting QB's take years to develop and are not clearly good until they learn the position. The prodigy's like Griffin are in fact the rare ones.

I understand what you are saying but perhaps I should have been more clear. I am of the opinion that you know whether a QB has the capacity to be a top QB pretty early. You can see it in the way he runs the offense, sees the field, earns respect, leads a team, throws a pass, makes plays. He may not produce all-pro numbers in that first year, but you realize that top production is inevitable moving forward.

I personally believe it was obvious within 6 games (of playing) that Rodgers, Brady, Manning, Ryan, Dalton, Griffin, Luck, Roethsburger, even Ponder were going to be top QBs. I do think there were others such as Eli, Flacco, Brees (although his potential was apparent) and Schaub that took time to develop. But all in all, with the great ones you know immediately -- and in this league you have to have a great one to consistently win and/or make the SB.

[andyjens89]

Are we really comparing the Bears' backup QB to Robert Griffin III?

[KazooSkinsFan]

Are we really comparing the Bears' backup QB to Robert Griffin III?

No, no one is doing that even Jason's supporters

[andyjens89]

Alright, just checking

[fetus]

Jason was the most contacted an in the league over the time he was here and took a beating... Also the last two years he was here I'm pretty sure he was the most sclerosis and also he had pressure in his face with in 1 sec of the snap in his last two years.

I can't tell whether you're trying to make an argument with stats and facts or are just saying aloud what you remember. Because it seems to me you are misremembering the facts of the matter.

Arguably, when jansen, rabach, samuels, Thomas and dockery, or whoever was playing LG, was healthy Jason seemed to play well... But how often was that line actually healthy...

Did you do any research before writing this response? I'm guessing no, since you are wondering about something that's pretty easy to verify . . . and I don't think you're going to like what you find.

Our LGs during those years, by the way, were Derrick Dockery and Pete Kendall, both of whom were pretty good. (Remember that Dockery signed one of the biggest deals of the offseason when he left us for the Bills.)

I just don't get where this "never had a line" stuff is coming from. I suppose a Pro Bowler and multiple consistent starters doesn't count.

Jason had to live through heyer and portis being hurt for three years and samuels missing for two years and so on and so on.... Jason never had a chance

Chris Samuels was a full-time starter for all but one season. Portis played the full year in 2 of Campell's 3 starting seasons. I suspect your "and so on and so on" is code for "I don't really have anything else to say."

Look, Campell had plenty of chances. Five years on the team, three and a half seasons where he had the keys to the offense, is more than enough. We had a playoff quality defense and running game. Our offensive line was not bad. We were short on receiving weapons, but a good QB could have made it work.

We were a playoff team in those years with quality QBing. Campbell wasn't bringing that to the table, and no, it's not because he "never had a line . . . ever," which is a ridiculous thing to say.

wow didn't mean to strike a nerve.....

but any way Samuels missed the last three games of 2008 and then missed all games in 2009 starting october 11th.
Portis missed significant time through out the 2006 season after being injured in the preseason and also missed weeks 10-17 during 2009.
That should have said RG instead of LG anyway, so, sorry about Dockery
Also I'm sorry that I was wrong about campbell he is second in completion percentage, 61.2%, to brad johnson's 61.5%, of player who have more than 10 games that played QB. The actual record holder is Brandon Banks with 100%.
in 2007 we were 16th in sacks allowed in 2009 we were 8th in sacks allowed. all other years campbellw as QB we did ok but we were the least sacked team in 2006 when he was named stater but did not start the whole season.

either way, no matter what I say, I will be wrong so....

RG3!!!!

[Irn-Bru]

wow didn't mean to strike a nerve.....

No nerve struck here. Just wasn't sure what you could have meant at first and now I'm trying to dispell the darkness of ignorance.

but any way Samuels missed the last three games of 2008 and then missed all games in 2009 starting october 11th.

Right, as I pointed out. He went to the Pro Bowl in '08, by the way. Not bad for a nonexistent line.

Portis missed significant time through out the 2006 season after being injured in the preseason and also missed weeks 10-17 during 2009.

Campbell wasn't a full time starter until our season was essentially over in 2006.

And like Samuels, I already pointed out that Portis missed this time. I appreciate you double-checking my work, but what was supposed to be your point here?

That should have said RG instead of LG anyway, so, sorry about Dockery

Well our RG during those years was Randy Thomas, who IMO was better than either Dockery or Kendall. (I thought Dockery, even though he was a solid starter, got way overpaid to go to the Bills. We got great service out of Thomas.)

either way, no matter what I say, I will be wrong so....

No, you'll be right if you say that Campbell did have an offensive line while he played here. Have you been persuaded by me on that point yet?

[markshark84]

Jason was the most contacted an in the league over the time he was here and took a beating... Also the last two years he was here I'm pretty sure he was the most sclerosis and also he had pressure in his face with in 1 sec of the snap in his last two years.

I can't tell whether you're trying to make an argument with stats and facts or are just saying aloud what you remember. Because it seems to me you are misremembering the facts of the matter.

Arguably, when jansen, rabach, samuels, Thomas and dockery, or whoever was playing LG, was healthy Jason seemed to play well... But how often was that line actually healthy...

Did you do any research before writing this response? I'm guessing no, since you are wondering about something that's pretty easy to verify . . . and I don't think you're going to like what you find.

Our LGs during those years, by the way, were Derrick Dockery and Pete Kendall, both of whom were pretty good. (Remember that Dockery signed one of the biggest deals of the offseason when he left us for the Bills.)

I just don't get where this "never had a line" stuff is coming from. I suppose a Pro Bowler and multiple consistent starters doesn't count.

Jason had to live through heyer and portis being hurt for three years and samuels missing for two years and so on and so on.... Jason never had a chance

Chris Samuels was a full-time starter for all but one season. Portis played the full year in 2 of Campell's 3 starting seasons. I suspect your "and so on and so on" is code for "I don't really have anything else to say."

Look, Campell had plenty of chances. Five years on the team, three and a half seasons where he had the keys to the offense, is more than enough. We had a playoff quality defense and running game. Our offensive line was not bad. We were short on receiving weapons, but a good QB could have made it work.

We were a playoff team in those years with quality QBing. Campbell wasn't bringing that to the table, and no, it's not because he "never had a line . . . ever," which is a ridiculous thing to say.

wow didn't mean to strike a nerve.....

but any way Samuels missed the last three games of 2008 and then missed all games in 2009 starting october 11th.
Portis missed significant time through out the 2006 season after being injured in the preseason and also missed weeks 10-17 during 2009.
That should have said RG instead of LG anyway, so, sorry about Dockery
Also I'm sorry that I was wrong about campbell he is second in completion percentage, 61.2%, to brad johnson's 61.5%, of player who have more than 10 games that played QB. The actual record holder is Brandon Banks with 100%.
in 2007 we were 16th in sacks allowed in 2009 we were 8th in sacks allowed. all other years campbellw as QB we did ok but we were the least sacked team in 2006 when he was named stater but did not start the whole season.

either way, no matter what I say, I will be wrong so....

RG3!!!!

I agree. No matter what you say, you will be wrong -- because JC was a bad QB and there is no going around that. Nothing you will say or excuses you try to make will change that very simple fact.

Also -- don't even bring up the sacks; most of those were on JC. He sat in the pocket like a statute and held onto the ball for days. If JC was our QB right now, he would have been sacked at least 10 times in the STL game alone.

And completion % -- it should have been 80% given that is about the amount of the time he dumped the ball off to RBs or TEs after totally missing his open WRs and incorrectly going thru his progressions. At least Brad Johnson threw the ball downfield and lead us to an NFC championship. JC couldn't lead a team to the lockers.

[fetus]

too much quoting to do here so anyway
Irn-Bru no I have not been persuaded lol
and
Mark Shark I will not say taht JC was a BAD qb but I will say he wasn't great, I have never tried to argue that and never will.

I liked JC while he was here and thought he would end up here for a while, I was wrong.
I liked him when he was in Oakland and he seemed to do well there until he got hurt and Palmer came in.
Now he is a back up and O well.....
whatever happens, We aren't going to agree on anything so this is a pointless debate on both ends for us....

[Irn-Bru]

too much quoting to do here so anyway
Irn-Bru no I have not been persuaded lol

Hmm. So you still think Campbell "never had a line" while he was here, "ever"? I just don't see what your argument is supposed to be. You'd basically have to say that Chris Samuels was overrated, Jon Jansen stunk, Randy Thomas and Rabach were FA busts, and Dockery wasn't any good. I can't even name our OL starters from 2 years ago, but I can still name our 07/08 guys. They were good.

[TimSkin]

to the guy that is so worthless he couldn't hack it in the CFL and is getting arrested for drugs in Hawaii or to

I didn't know Brennan got arrested for drugs....What kind?

[fetus]

too much quoting to do here so anyway
Irn-Bru no I have not been persuaded lol

Hmm. So you still think Campbell "never had a line" while he was here, "ever"? I just don't see what your argument is supposed to be. You'd basically have to say that Chris Samuels was overrated, Jon Jansen stunk, Randy Thomas and Rabach were FA busts, and Dockery wasn't any good. I can't even name our OL starters from 2 years ago, but I can still name our 07/08 guys. They were good.

Thomas and Rabach were not free agent busts... they were decent at there position and when Thomas got hurt it sucked, probably my fav player on that line, beside Samuels. Dockery was okay in my mind but the guy just wasn't here it seemed, he was just waiting for that big contract to get him out when he hit FA.
In my mind when a guy is on his back every play or has pressure in his face a split second after every snap, I will not defend the O-line that is in front of him. That being said, Campbell was not by any means a great QB, I will never argue that, Campbell was a decent QB but I feel that he was not given enough time to throw the ball. I will agree he threw some into the ground but so did McNabb when he was here and iunno about anyone but me but, I would have much rather had Campbell here in Shanny's first season than McNabb.
Maybe I'm wrong and lets face it I was young during Campbell's years, hell I'm still young, but from what I can remember, watching the games, it seemed Jason had pressure in his face after every snap.
I will agree with you that the players we had in place on the O-line were definitely not the worst and Chris Samuels is one of the best LT in a while, just sucks that his career was cut short, but I will not agree with anyone that says Campbell had a great line in front of him and if he was better of a QB we could have went somewhere.
I don't think if we had any QB in the league at that time that our team could have done anything we hope for them to do.

but like I said, I am over it. I always like Jason and I still do, but I understand there are players that I never liked on our team that some did. It's just the name of the game, diff people, diff places, diff takes on things, diff opinoins

[emoses14]

to the guy that is so worthless he couldn't hack it in the CFL and is getting arrested for drugs in Hawaii or to

I didn't know Brennan got arrested for drugs....What kind?

Cocaine residue, but prosecutors declined to pursue drug possession charges. So "all" he will face charges on was the DUI arrest.

[fetus]

to the guy that is so worthless he couldn't hack it in the CFL and is getting arrested for drugs in Hawaii or to

I didn't know Brennan got arrested for drugs....What kind?

Cocaine residue, but prosecutors declined to pursue drug possession charges. So "all" he will face charges on was the DUI arrest.

Didn't Colt Brennan get really messed up in a car wreck in Hawaii like 3 years ago???

[SkinsJock]

Campbell was and is good enough to be a QB in the NFL .. THAT is ALL

He's not good enough to be a starter and he never will be for one reason, he does not think at NFL speed. You said NFL QB, and I won't reject backup, but he'll never be an able starter for that reason.

to be clear - ALL I said was that Campbell is an NFL QB - that is a fact

I'm not saying that he's bad but just that he's still getting a check from a franchise - he's an NFL QB

actually - I'm VERY surprised he's even a back-up QB

I'm not saying he's a bad QB - he's just VERY lucky to have a job as an NFL QB

[markshark84]

Mark Shark I will not say taht JC was a BAD qb but I will say he wasn't great, I have never tried to argue that and never will.

You won't argue it because you can't. There is nothing out there to even remotely make an out-of-this world arguement that JC was "great". You couldn't even argue that he was an average starter. He was a below average player. He killed this franchise for 4 years not to include wasted draft picks.

I liked JC while he was here and thought he would end up here for a while, I was wrong.

Yup. When actual football minds got into DC, JC was the first thing to go. I don't think that is a cooincidence.

I liked him when he was in Oakland and he seemed to do well there until he got hurt and Palmer came in.

He was never doing well there. That is SPECIFICALLY why they brought in Palmer. His injury wasn't the reason he was demoted -- it was his play. He was sitting behing one of the best OLs at the time in the NFL and -- once again -- putting up at best mediocre numbers. You put a decent QB back there like Stafford or even Rivers and they would be lighting it up. Instead JC was doing what he did best -- missing reads, not scoring TDs (19 TDs in 19 games), and dumping the ball to TEs and RBs (65% of all JC's completions went to either a TE or RB....).

If you like QBs that don't put up points and can't lead an offense, then I can understand why you liked him --- but if you are like most of the fans out there that want a leader, scoring TD (like RGIII), then I'm not sure what your thought process is.

We aren't going to agree on anything so this is a pointless debate on both ends for us....

I don't think the purpose here is to agree. It is more to understand the truth -- which is clear.

[hakeemthedream]

Real excited for this Sunday. I think this will be your quarterbacks toughest test to date. Not sure how he's going to handle having guys like JPP and Kiwi flying at him, but we are certainly going to find out a lot about him. We need to hit him early to make sure he thinks twice about taking off and running

[Deadskins]

Not sure how he's going to handle having guys like JPP and Kiwi flying at him

Better than Grossman did last year, and how'd that turn out?

[ATX_Skins]

Hakeem "the posers" Dream

You guys don't see it?

Where has that turd Poser been anyways?