Page 8 of 8
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:00 pm
by Dangerfield
If they do wait untilnext year to start him, then we do have the Philip Rivers example to hang our hopes on. We should have the same type of team next year that SD has this year...ie...we can run the hell out of the ball and keep it relatively conservative on O, play "5 across the lip" Defense, and hope to play with a lead all year. That could work! Sign Me UP!
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:23 pm
by Steve Spurrier III
wbbradb wrote:What strikes me about this argument is the assumption that right now we're "wasting time" with having JC on the bench, almost as if his skills are melting away, his arm is rusting up or something. It's easy for us fans to assume that's what's happening because we don't see anything from JC. But the coaches do. While we want to find out right now (and see the proof of it), we can't because he's on the bench. But the coaches are finding out every day what JC can do and can't do. He stays after every practice to get individual instruction, learn the offence, learn how to read defences, etc. You may say, we'll never know for sure unless he's in a game situation. That may be true, but it's also true that you would be risking an investment (not to mention a player's health and career) by putting him in before he's ready. I'm sure Gibbs and company have a plan, probably to start JC after two years of preparation. They want to stick to it. If you throw a rookie QB in there too early, you risk them learning bad habits, getting injured, or losing all confidence. For the long-term benefit of the Redskins, it's better if JC continues to sit and learn for a while longer.
That all may be true, but keep in mind that sitting for two years is abnormal for a quarterback drafted in the first round. In the past ten years, only Pennington and Phillip Rivers hadn't taken a snap through year two. Of course, Pennington has looked good when healthy and the early returns on Rivers look promising.
But at some point, the question becomes is Campbell being held back for his own good, or Mark Brunell's good. I don't think we're at that point quite yet, but we're getting close.
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 7:11 pm
by 1niksder
Steve Spurrier III wrote:But at some point, the question becomes is Campbell being held back for his own good, or Mark Brunell's good. I don't think we're at that point quite yet, but we're getting close.
At this point I'd say he is being held back for the good of the team, meaning he may not fully grasp all that they want him to. The problem is Brunell is on the feild and seems to have a limited grasp also. I don't think Gibbs would leave Mark in there hoping he'll improve, and I'm sure we would have heard from Saunders if that were the case. The problem is Mark isn't doing what he needs to do, Jason may not be sure as to all that he should do and Collins is just happy to be here.
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 9:45 pm
by Irn-Bru
1nik wrote:and Collins is just happy to be here.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 11:16 am
by Steve Spurrier III
1niksder wrote:At this point I'd say he is being held back for the good of the team, meaning he may not fully grasp all that they want him to.
I'd agree with that - as long as there is realistic hope for 2006 season. If we fall to the Texans, or start out 1-4, we have to start looking at the good of the franchise rather than just the good of this 2006 team.
edit - there, their, they're - I passed second grade.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 12:57 pm
by 1niksder
Steve Spurrier III wrote:1niksder wrote:At this point I'd say he is being held back for the good of the team, meaning he may not fully grasp all that they want him to.
I'd agree with that - as long as their is realistic hope for 2006 season. If we fall to the Texans, or start out 1-4, we have to start looking at the good of the franchise rather than just the good of this 2006 team.
I Agree
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 9:02 pm
by dmwc
i hope that we build on last year and this year... no more coaches or FA just rookies... like another DB, OL, DL, thats what we need
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:24 pm
by air_hog
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Look at you suckers now!
Boonell sucks!
What now, lets see what is he today, like 13 for 13 and 160 yards.
Yeah man, lets play a rookie!
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:32 pm
by 1niksder
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 3:39 pm
by thaiphoon
What now, lets see what is he today, like 13 for 13 and 160 yards.
He's got more than that against the NFL's version of the Homecoming opponent.
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:46 pm
by UK Skins Fan
The problem with changing horses midstream is that you stand a very good chance of drowning in the process.
I don't know what that means, but it seemed quite smart when I typed it.
