Best Qb

[RayNAustin]

All of this Colt Brennan hype is getting ridiculous. The guy played against third stringers, most of whom aren't even on NFL rosters anymore. Go check out the stats on NFL.com and take a look at how many 2nd and 3rd string qbs (that will never be more than backups) put up huge numbers during the preseason. Rookie Bret Ratliff of the Jets has a qb rating of 122.6 this preseason. Mark Brunell has a qb rating of 112.3, maybe we should bring him back

Question: What does Mark Brunell and Tod Collins have in common that Campbell doesn't share with them?

Answer: Playoffs.

[SkinsJock]

man are we lucky to have so many people who contribute here who know so much about the team and not only that but are so skilled at determining what other posters really intend by their posts.

As a few here (the "knowledgeable ones") will remember - I am not a Campbell fan. I just think he's looked a little tentative and takes too long in his reads - I have been willing to give him time to develop and IMO he gives us the best chance to be better BUT he had better be a lot better to be a big time QB.

I think that right now anyone with any knowledge of the game can see that our QB situation is very clear - we have to hope that Campbell shows he is at least capable (and maybe better) as our "starting QB" but he is the only one of the 3 that has the ability to be our starter - he needs to step it up but he is "the guy" for right now.

I also feel that we are very lucky to have a quality back-up like Collins but, really people, Colt Brennan could be a very good QB but that is going to take some time and if everything goes well for him he might even be ready to play effectively in the NFL in a year or more. Lets support him and encourage him all we can, but, to have him on the field as our starter this year or next, means an awful lot of bad things for this team.

Really? Anyone not agreeing with you obviously doesn't know much about the game? What arrogance.

Let me tell you something.....every single year, a large group of so called experts (those that actually work in the NFL for NFL teams) show that they don't always have a very firm grasp of the game.

So what - they are in the game - it's a part of the NFL

Even men who are considered great football men.....let's take Cowher, the hot commodity retired coach. He drafted Roethlisberger, and the plan was set in stone that Ben would sit for 2 years. Then Maddox got hurt, and then Batch, and they were forced to play Roethlisberger the rookie. They didn't choose to play him, they were forced to. And look what happened. Offensive rookie of the year. So how smart are the experts?

"great football men" - please! Cowher might be a very good NFL head coach but he's not a "great" and I'm certainly glad we don't have him here.

There are numerous better examples, like Brady, but that is the reality of the NFL. Just because there are numerous examples of these NFL coaches and FO guys making bad decisions does not mean that all the decisions they make are bad.

Same thing happened to us last year. Collins wasn't a choice, they were forced to play him. And look what happened? In retrospect, it was obvious that Collins was better suited to start (unless you aren't concerned with winning, and are totally committed to make a failing "franchise player" a success at any and all costs).

Collins is a very good back up QB but I happen to agree with the NFL guys (on our team and others) who think that our immediate future is with Campbell. I have already said I am not that sure that he's going to be very good but he is the best we've got right now - there are not a lot of people in the NFL who would play Collins instead of Campbell. That is a fact that is NOT arrogance.
IF Campbell does not show that he is going to be very good this year, then we are in a lot worse shape than we thought.

From the moment we kept as many picks in this year's draft, this team has shown that they are more committed to the future than just this year. This team is now trying to be better for next year as well as this year. This is a big change for the Redskins.

This pre-season....go look at the stats.....all of the stats for the QBs. Collins stats are better, and Brennan's are way better than Campbell. OK so they were against "scrubs". He was also playing with "scrubs"....if you'd choose to call Mason and BMC scrubs. Those scrubs led the NFL in rushing and receiving during pre-season and were cut, while we kept a couple of picks that look terrible. But the experts know best.

the pre-season stats mean nothing - give me a break.

But go ahead and compare Collins stats to Campbell, and explain to me HOW Collins looked terrible, and JC is the clear starter? The numbers don't say that. The numbers say Campbell is #3.

Collins completion % 70.2 to JC 59% 260 yards to 206. Int % better, less sacks, better yards per completion, and a QB rating of 81.9 to Campbell's 70.7.

So if Collins looked terrible, how did Campbell look? You wouldn't know, because you can't see through those rose colored glasses you wear when Campbell is on the field.

You think the "numbers" should decide? Stats are really ONLY all important in baseball NOT football - that's what's wrong with sports' teams who place all their faith in "stats" players. They never seem to measure up to teams who select the players that make the whole team better.

I hear some of the "experts" on TV talking about how well suited Campbell is for Zorn's WC offense. What a load of nonsense. Campbell's biggest liability is his slow decision making and slow release (been that way from day one and hasn't improved much if any). So how is that well suited for an offense that requires the QB to make quick reads of the defensive alignments at the line to set blocking assignments, and then quick reads after the snap? He has twice the responsibility he had under Saunders offense, and he struggled with that between 2006 and 2007?

I'd say you don't have to be a football expert to understand this basic logic.

This undying infatuation with Jason Campbell is bordering on mass psychosis.

Campbell looked so bad against Carolina that they had him run 3 series against Jacksonville in order to find something resembling rhythm. And after those three series they gave up, and pulled him out. I guess they figure that to continue would have been risky....not injury wise, but mentally risky.

how do you know what Zorn was basing his decisions on?

Yet it is oh so clear that Campbell MUST BE the starter, and anyone who thinks differently just doesn't know much about football.

What a crock.


To say that it is

I'll say it again - we are so lucky to have such insight.

Campbell is here, the season is about to begin and now some here want to change the QB that is just not going to happen.

Look - I don't like it but we have a team that is hoping to be competitive and in my opinion will not be too bad this year but we are also building this team to be better for the long run, not just this year.

[VetSkinsFan]

All of this Colt Brennan hype is getting ridiculous. The guy played against third stringers, most of whom aren't even on NFL rosters anymore. Go check out the stats on NFL.com and take a look at how many 2nd and 3rd string qbs (that will never be more than backups) put up huge numbers during the preseason. Rookie Bret Ratliff of the Jets has a qb rating of 122.6 this preseason. Mark Brunell has a qb rating of 112.3, maybe we should bring him back

Question: What does Mark Brunell and Tod Collins have in common that Campbell doesn't share with them?

Answer: Playoffs.

... and Social Security.

[RayNAustin]

man are we lucky to have so many people who contribute here who know so much about the team and not only that but are so skilled at determining what other posters really intend by their posts.

I don't pretend to know what you intended to say. I just know what you said:

I think that right now anyone with any knowledge of the game can see that our QB situation is very clear"

What's clear is that your statement says anyone who doesn't agree that Campbell is the clear choice doesn't know anything about football. That's what you said. Did you not intend on saying that?

To be blunt, I don't agree with either opinions. Granted, the consensus here shares your opinion, but that doesn't make it correct. At one time the consensus opinion believed the world was flat too.

It's my contention that there is actual evidence that supports my opinion, while yours and others are based on conjecture. Perhaps it's just my lack of football knowledge that prevents me from understanding why last year's demonstrated ability of winning football games with Collins is irrelevant. Or maybe I just totally reject the idea that a team that made it to the playoffs last year (in one of the toughest divisions in the NFL) should be undergoing a rebuild or should be more concerned with the future of Jason Campbell at the expense of the team presently.

There are numerous better examples, like Brady, but that is the reality of the NFL. Just because there are numerous examples of these NFL coaches and FO guys making bad decisions does not mean that all the decisions they make are bad.

I never suggested that they were. I just pointed out that they are wrong quite often, and certainly not infallible .....but god forbid that YOU could be wrong. Frankly, anyone paying much attention might have noticed that Gibbs & Co had more than their fair share of personnel "miscalculations" over the past 4 years here, and Collins sort of proved that they had the wrong guy starting last year.

Collins is a very good back up QB but I happen to agree with the NFL guys (on our team and others) who think that our immediate future is with Campbell. I have already said I am not that sure that he's going to be very good but he is the best we've got right now - there are not a lot of people in the NFL who would play Collins instead of Campbell. That is a fact that is NOT arrogance.
IF Campbell does not show that he is going to be very good this year, then we are in a lot worse shape than we thought.

So this FACT you've checked out aye? Taken a poll of the NFL coaching staffs to see who they'd pick? LMAO First, no one outside the Redskins organization would have the knowledge necessary to make such a call. So I think this particular FACT of yours is just an opinion, again based on conjecture. And when one considers his own opinion as FACT, while discounting another's opinion as lacking any reasonable knowledge, that sounds like arrogance to me....my opinion.

From the moment we kept as many picks in this year's draft, this team has shown that they are more committed to the future than just this year. This team is now trying to be better for next year as well as this year. This is a big change for the Redskins.

Trading draft picks for a 34 year old DE doesn't sound to me like they are TOTALLY committed to the youth movement. And in my opinion, cutting BMC and Mason were terrible decisions, as was the decision to carry only 5 WRs, when one of them is lamed up, and the another is not looking good for the near term. That means that we will be starting the season with those same three WRs that caused all of Jason Campbell's problems last year. How's he supposed to get better that way?

You think the "numbers" should decide? Stats are really ONLY all important in baseball NOT football - that's what's wrong with sports' teams who place all their faith in "stats" players. They never seem to measure up to teams who select the players that make the whole team better.

Of course you're right. Stats like how many points you score and how many points you allow mean nothing in football....only baseball finds such things important.

how do you know what Zorn was basing his decisions on?

Press conference. Zorn: "I would have loved to have them play the whole game and just grind it out and work at getting some rhythm and things like that, but that would not have been smart in my mind. It was a matter of getting them back out there and not having what happened the week before (against the Carolina Panthers happen again)."

I'll say it again - we are so lucky to have such insight.

No....not a trace of arrogance.

[RayNAustin]

All of this Colt Brennan hype is getting ridiculous. The guy played against third stringers, most of whom aren't even on NFL rosters anymore. Go check out the stats on NFL.com and take a look at how many 2nd and 3rd string qbs (that will never be more than backups) put up huge numbers during the preseason. Rookie Bret Ratliff of the Jets has a qb rating of 122.6 this preseason. Mark Brunell has a qb rating of 112.3, maybe we should bring him back

Question: What does Mark Brunell and Tod Collins have in common that Campbell doesn't share with them?

Answer: Playoffs.

... and Social Security.

That's a good one! And another is a win against the cowgirls

[cleg]

Let me tell you something.....every single year, a large group of so called experts (those that actually work in the NFL for NFL teams) show that they don't always have a very firm grasp of the game

That's true. On the other hand, every year a bunch of amateur GMs and Head Coaches think that just because they think something and want immediate gratification they ASSUME they know more then the aforementioned experts, including HOF coaches and an organization who took us to the playoffs last year despite our being ravaged by injuries. Hypothetically of course.

Not to mention ex-NFL QBs.

The organization didn't take anyone anywhere. The players, in spite of the horrible coaching, made a run at the playoffs.

What's so funny? Are you suffering from amnesia or something?

Do you not remember what happened last year? The sideline looked like the keystone cops. They couldn't get the plays in without wasting timeouts, and they didn't know you couldn't call consecutive timeouts. They spiked the ball on first and goal from the 1 yard line with 55 seconds left to kill the clock ?? And then, they leave Portis standing on the sideline while they run Betts and Sellers. You don't leave your top RB sitting on the sideline with the game on the line. Even the network TV guys were commenting on all this stuff. It was becoming embarrassing, really. Frankly, the offense looked like it was being run by committee. A confused committee no less.

So yes, it was the players that circled the wagons, along with an unplanned injury to Campbell that set the stage for a playoff run. Not great coaching. What I remember is the futility of the "jumbo formation" that Gibbs refused to abandon every time we got into the red zone in spite of how many times it got stuffed. I remember how painfully predictable the offense was.

And most of all, I remember how we were in a free fall tail spin 4 game losing streak and working hard on a 5th until Campbell was injured and Collins came in and made the entire coaching staff look like idiots for not playing him sooner.

God, what horrible memories. Thanks, I had blocked all of this out of my mind...but now the nightmares are back.

[SkinsJock]

man are we lucky to have so many people who contribute here who know so much about the team and not only that but are so skilled at determining what other posters really intend by their posts.

I don't pretend to know what you intended to say. I just know what you said:

I think that right now anyone with any knowledge of the game can see that our QB situation is very clear"

What's clear is that your statement says anyone who doesn't agree that Campbell is the clear choice doesn't know anything about football. That's what you said. Did you not intend on saying that?

No! I said that our QB "ituation is clear - we have to hope that Campbell has what it takes because it is clear to most that Collins is a very good back-up QB but he is not what you would term a starting caliber type QB. He may be better than Campbell to some but I would be very surprised to hear anyone in the NFL think that Collins offers more upside than Campbell

Then you offer this:

To be blunt, I don't agree with either opinions. Granted, the consensus here shares your opinion, but that doesn't make it correct. At one time the consensus opinion believed the world was flat too.

You win - this is just too good a response - well done.

[Deadskins]

Let me tell you something.....every single year, a large group of so called experts (those that actually work in the NFL for NFL teams) show that they don't always have a very firm grasp of the game

That's true. On the other hand, every year a bunch of amateur GMs and Head Coaches think that just because they think something and want immediate gratification they ASSUME they know more then the aforementioned experts, including HOF coaches and an organization who took us to the playoffs last year despite our being ravaged by injuries. Hypothetically of course.

Not to mention ex-NFL QBs.

The organization didn't take anyone anywhere. The players, in spite of the horrible coaching, made a run at the playoffs.

What's so funny? Are you suffering from amnesia or something?

Do you not remember what happened last year? The sideline looked like the keystone cops. They couldn't get the plays in without wasting timeouts, and they didn't know you couldn't call consecutive timeouts. They spiked the ball on first and goal from the 1 yard line with 55 seconds left to kill the clock ?? And then, they leave Portis standing on the sideline while they run Betts and Sellers. You don't leave your top RB sitting on the sideline with the game on the line. Even the network TV guys were commenting on all this stuff. It was becoming embarrassing, really. Frankly, the offense looked like it was being run by committee. A confused committee no less.

So yes, it was the players that circled the wagons, along with an unplanned injury to Campbell that set the stage for a playoff run. Not great coaching. What I remember is the futility of the "jumbo formation" that Gibbs refused to abandon every time we got into the red zone in spite of how many times it got stuffed. I remember how painfully predictable the offense was.

And most of all, I remember how we were in a free fall tail spin 4 game losing streak and working hard on a 5th until Campbell was injured and Collins came in and made the entire coaching staff look like idiots for not playing him sooner.

What's so funny is you thinking the players could have circled the wagons if they had not been coached well. That they were able to execute the offense at all, means that the were coached to be able to do so. It's a catch-22. The one predicates the other.

[KazooSkinsFan]

The organization didn't take anyone anywhere. The players, in spite of the horrible coaching, made a run at the playoffs.

Yes, you can spin all facts to meet a pre-determined outcome. Nice demonstration of that. So basically, Gibbs is an incompetent, sixth round draft picks who play well in the pre-season against scrubs are ready to start in the NFL, you don't need to groom QBs they come wrapped in Xmas boxes. You've just got all the answers, got it. And yet somehow your "facts" don't match any sort of statistical reality about Quarterbacks and our incompetent Hall of Fame coach won 3 Super Bowls. I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion you've got more knowledge then our new coach too. Is it because all that experience playing and coaching doesn't include being a Head Coach yet? Gosh, he wasn't even an OC before, clearly a random fan with a loud voice and a bunch of opinions knows more then that.

[RayNAustin]

man are we lucky to have so many people who contribute here who know so much about the team and not only that but are so skilled at determining what other posters really intend by their posts.

I don't pretend to know what you intended to say. I just know what you said:

I think that right now anyone with any knowledge of the game can see that our QB situation is very clear"

What's clear is that your statement says anyone who doesn't agree that Campbell is the clear choice doesn't know anything about football. That's what you said. Did you not intend on saying that?

No! I said that our QB "ituation is clear - we have to hope that Campbell has what it takes because it is clear to most that Collins is a very good back-up QB but he is not what you would term a starting caliber type QB. He may be better than Campbell to some but I would be very surprised to hear anyone in the NFL think that Collins offers more upside than Campbell

Then you offer this:

To be blunt, I don't agree with either opinions. Granted, the consensus here shares your opinion, but that doesn't make it correct. At one time the consensus opinion believed the world was flat too.

You win - this is just too good a response - well done.

I hope I end up wrong, and Campbell does well and the Redskins win.

Then we all win.

[RayNAustin]

The organization didn't take anyone anywhere. The players, in spite of the horrible coaching, made a run at the playoffs.

Yes, you can spin all facts to meet a pre-determined outcome. Nice demonstration of that. So basically, Gibbs is an incompetent, sixth round draft picks who play well in the pre-season against scrubs are ready to start in the NFL, you don't need to groom QBs they come wrapped in Xmas boxes. You've just got all the answers, got it. And yet somehow your "facts" don't match any sort of statistical reality about Quarterbacks and our incompetent Hall of Fame coach won 3 Super Bowls. I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion you've got more knowledge then our new coach too. Is it because all that experience playing and coaching doesn't include being a Head Coach yet? Gosh, he wasn't even an OC before, clearly a random fan with a loud voice and a bunch of opinions knows more then that.

That's all you ever do isn't it? You make accusations without foundation. I didn't spin anything. I stated facts. If you feel those facts are untrue or distorted, make your case....be specific.

And if you bothered to read the entire dialog, you might have noticed that I haven't advocated starting Brennan. In fact, I said Campbell was probably the only choice at this stage.

But I do not agree that Campbell should be given an entire season of repeating the mistakes of last year. Campbell should be on a short leash, and if he doesn't show marked improvement fairly quickly, Collins should be given a shot while we still have a season to salvage. He did a pretty good job last year.

But if we stick with Campbell and dig ourselves a huge hole, then, Brennan should get a look to see what he looks like in preparation for next year. Because if Campbell doesn't get it together this year, he's done...or should be done.

[SkinsFreak]

[Gibbs4Life]

Dear God please get me to Thursday night. It has been a loooong off-season and a looonger pre-season. Threads are just not coming out as interesting and it's because we're all running on fumes and speculation! I feel like I'm in Dante's inferno for two more days at which point I will be shown heaven which looks like Redskins 48 Giants 0.

[Deadskins]

And if you bothered to read the entire dialog, you might have noticed that I haven't advocated starting Brennan. In fact, I said Campbell was probably the only choice at this stage.

I've been reading it from page one, and commenting throughout. Nowhere did I ever see you say that. I remember it being said to you many, many times, but unless I skipped a page, and I don't think I did, you've never advocated for Campbell to start this season under center. Neither in this thread, nor any of the other 3000 JC threads in Hogwash this pre-season.

[Fios]

Yawn

ditto

[RayNAustin]

And if you bothered to read the entire dialog, you might have noticed that I haven't advocated starting Brennan. In fact, I said Campbell was probably the only choice at this stage.

I've been reading it from page one, and commenting throughout. Nowhere did I ever see you say that. I remember it being said to you many, many times, but unless I skipped a page, and I don't think I did, you've never advocated for Campbell to start this season under center. Neither in this thread, nor any of the other 3000 JC threads in Hogwash this pre-season.

Page 6 of this thread

"And I might even agree that at this point, the Redskins have left themselves little choice other than to start Campbell. But if he continues to struggle, he needs to be pulled. Put Collins in there and if he struggles, yank his butt too, and put the Kid in.

Page 8 (Fair Shake thread)

As for what "Jim" thinks....that's hard to say. I don't think Jim knows what Jim thinks yet. He certainly can't be thrilled with Campbell's pre-season performance, but starting Campbell may be the only option he has, politically speaking. But I don't think Zorn's leash is going to be as long as Gibbs leash was regarding Campbell. If Campbell stinks the joint up over the next 5 or 6 games and we go 1-5, or 0-6, he might start leaning toward a change. I suspect Campbell has half a season to start showing him something, not the whole season. After that, I think Campbell will have either solidified his position as the starter, or Collins, and or maybe even Brennan will get a look if we are in a big enough hole by then.

Any more dito heads???

My personal opinion is that the competition should have been open for Collins and Campbell to go head to head, with the best preseason performer getting the start. Because it wasn't handled that way, Jason got most of the work and therefore is by default, the most prudent choice to start (with a very short leash).

I love what I saw in Brennan, and if you search back to the draft days, I said then that he might be the big steal of the draft, but no where, no how, and at no time have I said that Brennan should start. I said of the three QB's he looks most comfortable with the offense, and is the only one who''s demonstrated the ability to complete passes down field. But never have I called for Brennan to start.

I personally believe (hope I'm wrong) that JC's problems aren't going away, and that even though Collins doesn't possess the physical gifts that Campbell has, he has demonstrated much better accuracy throwing, and the ability to put points on the board and win games. Therefore, from that standpoint, Collins gives the Redskins the best chance to win, in my opinion.

And the bloody numbers support that opinion. ALL OF THE NUMBERS support that stance, none the least of which is Collins 4-0 regular season record to JC's 8-12 record.

[Deadskins]

And if you bothered to read the entire dialog, you might have noticed that I haven't advocated starting Brennan. In fact, I said Campbell was probably the only choice at this stage.

I've been reading it from page one, and commenting throughout. Nowhere did I ever see you say that. I remember it being said to you many, many times, but unless I skipped a page, and I don't think I did, you've never advocated for Campbell to start this season under center. Neither in this thread, nor any of the other 3000 JC threads in Hogwash this pre-season.

Page 6 of this thread

"And I might even agree that at this point, the Redskins have left themselves little choice other than to start Campbell. But if he continues to struggle, he needs to be pulled. Put Collins in there and if he struggles, yank his butt too, and put the Kid in.

Page 8 (Fair Shake thread)

As for what "Jim" thinks....that's hard to say. I don't think Jim knows what Jim thinks yet. He certainly can't be thrilled with Campbell's pre-season performance, but starting Campbell may be the only option he has, politically speaking. But I don't think Zorn's leash is going to be as long as Gibbs leash was regarding Campbell. If Campbell stinks the joint up over the next 5 or 6 games and we go 1-5, or 0-6, he might start leaning toward a change. I suspect Campbell has half a season to start showing him something, not the whole season. After that, I think Campbell will have either solidified his position as the starter, or Collins, and or maybe even Brennan will get a look if we are in a big enough hole by then.

Saying Zorn has no choice is not the same thing as saying JC is our best option. And on page 9 of the JC and a fair shake thread:

I reject the idea that Campbell is the best option argument not because he isn't Brett Favre, but because of Campbell's inherent weaknesses. Clear enough?

Yes. Yes it is.

[VetSkinsFan]

My personal opinion is that the competition should have been open for Collins and Campbell to go head to head, with the best preseason performer getting the start. Because it wasn't handled that way, Jason got most of the work and therefore is by default, the most prudent choice to start (with a very short leash).

I don't believe that a 1st year HC implementing a new offensive scheme should start a 38 yo career back-up. He's got 1-2 years MAX, and THEN he's got to start all over with a new QB. Not smart in the long term IMO. I believe this is a considerable portion of why JC was given the job with no competition.

[RayNAustin]

Look, JSPB22, I like debating with you. So if I respond sharply sometimes, don't take it personally....all in good fun (there are 1 or 2 here that I won't name - they know who they are, for which that doesn't apply).

But you said I didn't say what I said I said. You were wrong. READ it again.

I said:

And if you bothered to read the entire dialog, you might have noticed that I haven't advocated starting Brennan. In fact, I said Campbell was probably the only choice at this stage.

That's what I said. That Campbell was probably the only choice at this stage. That's not to be confused with saying that I think he IS the best choice because he is the best QB.

Saying Zorn has no choice is not the same thing as saying JC is our best option.

You're right. And no where have I ever said that I think Campbell is the best option....nor have I ever claimed to say that. I said he was probably the only option for a couple of reasons, none of which has anything to do with his actual performance.

One such reason is that I think the Redskins made that decision prior to the start of Camp....probably not Zorn's decision at all. Consequently, Campbell got most of the work and most of the coaching, so he would likely be better prepared than the other guys (Brennan to green to start) and Collins didn't get enough work with the first team and all of the one on one work with Zorn.

The other reason is that prior to seeing how quickly Brennan began picking up the offense (don't confuse that with me thinking he is ready to start), Campbell and Collins were the only two choices. And if you still are committed to bringing Campbell along, then he's the proper one to select to start because he certainly isn't going to work out his difficulties holding a clipboard. Again, that doesn't make him the best option....it makes him the only reasonable choice given this choice of direction.

Maybe this is confusing. I'm trying not to be. I don't think I've left any doubt about my evaluation of Campbell's performance thus far. And if I were in Zorn's shoes, I'm sure that I would be starting Campbell too under the circumstances...one, he probably doesn't have a choice, and two, he has to see for himself whether he can correct Campbell's difficiencies because that's part of the reason Snyder hired him. So given that the commitment is still there, you have to suck it up, and suffer through the growing pains with Campbell. Though I personally wouldn't suffer too long before making a change.

Some here suggest that we give him 2 more years. That's nuts. He should get no more than 8 games, after that, he has either earned the job or lost it.

If he loses it, then it's time to get off the river of denial, and take you medicine.

[RayNAustin]

My personal opinion is that the competition should have been open for Collins and Campbell to go head to head, with the best preseason performer getting the start. Because it wasn't handled that way, Jason got most of the work and therefore is by default, the most prudent choice to start (with a very short leash).

I don't believe that a 1st year HC implementing a new offensive scheme should start a 38 yo career back-up. He's got 1-2 years MAX, and THEN he's got to start all over with a new QB. Not smart in the long term IMO. I believe this is a considerable portion of why JC was given the job with no competition.

I agree with you. So long as the commitment to Campbell exists you need to give it your best shot, and accept the consequences.

My point is this: I don't think Collins is a sleeper Brett Favre that was simply mis-diagnosed as a career backup for the past 10 years. So his performance last year tells me that this team is talented enough to be successful with a competent (rather than elite) QB. And that is what Collins is, a competent QB who can make enough plays when you need them to win.

On the other hand, I personally have seen enough of Campbell that if it were my decision, I would have addressed this in the off season differently. Hell, I might even have brought in Favre, because even at his age, he's better than Campbell and Collins combined. And I do not agree that the Redskins should accept another losing season to develop a QB that hasn't shown marked improvement.

There are some ifs......like if Collins had played all year last year like he played in the last 4 games, the Redskins might have won the division, and maybe played at home for the playoffs? And that is with Collins. What if we had Brett Favre? If Favre plays this year the way he played last year, the Redskins would absolutely be serious contenders to win the east, and maybe go all the way.

Why would anyone choose to abandon that possibility for an underachieving project like Campbell? And that is what Campbell still is right now...still a project.

[VetSkinsFan]

My point is this: I don't think Collins is a sleeper Brett Favre that was simply mis-diagnosed as a career backup for the past 10 years. So his performance last year tells me that this team is talented enough to be successful with a competent (rather than elite) QB. And that is what Collins is, a competent QB who can make enough plays when you need them to win.

I've been of the same mindset. Another facet that is conveniently forgotten quite frequently is that the O-line became static around the same time JC got injured. The running was better and so was the blocking. I remember for the 1st 5 weeks, we did not have the same 5 starters in two consecutive games. There will not be success up front with that situation, which is 1 factor affecting JC's start last year. Not an excuse, but it is relevant.

[RayNAustin]

Yes, this may be true. But a QB that holds the ball too long can make a line look real bad. And a QB that gets the ball out fast, and makes plays down field keeps that pass rush in check. They can't just come after you on every down when you are clicking. And it also helps the running game.

I'm not big on coincidences, so I don't think the O-line just magically got better at the same time Collins came in any more than I think the receivers got taller or their arms got longer.

And in Seattle, I saw what had to be one of the worst o-line performances in post season history.

[1niksder]

I'm not big on coincidences, so I don't think the O-line just magically got better at the same time Collins came in any more than I think the receivers got taller or their arms got longer.

And in Seattle, I saw what had to be one of the worst o-line performances in post season history.

No coincedences, check the injury reports from that time of the season. The numbers pretty much stayed the same but look at the names OL and WR came off the list as LB and DB went on

[RayNAustin]

I'm not big on coincidences, so I don't think the O-line just magically got better at the same time Collins came in any more than I think the receivers got taller or their arms got longer.

And in Seattle, I saw what had to be one of the worst o-line performances in post season history.

No coincedences, check the injury reports from that time of the season. The numbers pretty much stayed the same but look at the names OL and WR came off the list as LB and DB went on

I think you missed my point.....in Seattle, the o-line was horrible. They were dominated to the point of embarrassment. So having a couple of guys back from injuries on the o-line didn't transform this bunch into the hogs.

Secondly, I don't recall all of these players returning to the line up the very instant Campbell went down in the middle of the Chicago game. But I do remember Collins instantly moving the team in for two TD's in two series with the same EXACT players Campbell was using for his all too familiar three and outs.

I'm just calling it like I see it. I'm neither spinning it to make Collins look good or Campbell look bad. It just is what it is. That's what happened.

It seems to me that those who look for any reason to explain Collins success other than his better performance in comparison to Campbell's poor performance are the one's emotionally attached to a certain outcome.

I would love to see Campbell light it up and become the player everyone thinks he already is. I don't sit here and secretly hope he fails because of some personal dislike of him. I've simply analyzed his performance and progress and find that he's come up way short of good.

And aside from the plethora of excuses disguised as reasons, I don't see the light at the end of the tunnel with him. Any average QB can be successful in a perfectly ideal situation. But those situations rarely exist. Injuries are a part of the game, and all teams and all QBs have to deal with it and still produce. Campbell hasn't.

But he has a golden opportunity today. The Giants aren't as strong as the were last year. They're missing half of their D-line which I think accounted for half of their team last year. Eli is erratic and inconsistent, and their LB's and secondary are vulnerable.

This is a game that the Skins can win. But Campbell will have to produce or they won't win.

We'll soon see.

[VetSkinsFan]

I'm not big on coincidences, so I don't think the O-line just magically got better at the same time Collins came in any more than I think the receivers got taller or their arms got longer.

And in Seattle, I saw what had to be one of the worst o-line performances in post season history.

No coincedences, check the injury reports from that time of the season. The numbers pretty much stayed the same but look at the names OL and WR came off the list as LB and DB went on

I think you missed my point.....in Seattle, the o-line was horrible. They were dominated to the point of embarrassment. So having a couple of guys back from injuries on the o-line didn't transform this bunch into the hogs.

Secondly, I don't recall all of these players returning to the line up the very instant Campbell went down in the middle of the Chicago game. But I do remember Collins instantly moving the team in for two TD's in two series with the same EXACT players Campbell was using for his all too familiar three and outs.

I'm just calling it like I see it. I'm neither spinning it to make Collins look good or Campbell look bad. It just is what it is. That's what happened.

It seems to me that those who look for any reason to explain Collins success other than his better performance in comparison to Campbell's poor performance are the one's emotionally attached to a certain outcome.

I would love to see Campbell light it up and become the player everyone thinks he already is. I don't sit here and secretly hope he fails because of some personal dislike of him. I've simply analyzed his performance and progress and find that he's come up way short of good.

And aside from the plethora of excuses disguised as reasons, I don't see the light at the end of the tunnel with him. Any average QB can be successful in a perfectly ideal situation. But those situations rarely exist. Injuries are a part of the game, and all teams and all QBs have to deal with it and still produce. Campbell hasn't.

But he has a golden opportunity today. The Giants aren't as strong as the were last year. They're missing half of their D-line which I think accounted for half of their team last year. Eli is erratic and inconsistent, and their LB's and secondary are vulnerable.

This is a game that the Skins can win. But Campbell will have to produce or they won't win.

We'll soon see.

I don't attribute all of Collins success to the injury recovery, but the line had played 2-4 weeks together before JC got hurt. That gives time for the o-line to gel, which is crucial for protections. I'm also in agreeance that JC does read slow/hold on to the ball too long, which coupled with a patchwork line, compounds the shortcomings that were there. If we have line cohesion, then good things will come out of it. The run game will bail us out (to a point).