The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

markshark84 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:According to this article, the Ravens played a simple strategy that's worked.

Clamp down on Santana Moss (because no other receiver is worth a damn), then blitz every one else.

Like other teams in recent weeks, the Ravens were generally willing to play the run in cover-2, not having to put additional manpower at the line. They alternated between doubling receiver Santana Moss, the only true deep threat, and also playing tight press-man coverage on the smallish outside receivers when they wanted to allocate more defensive backs to the blitz. Campbell was hit 23 times in the losses to Pittsburgh, New York and Dallas, and seven times last night.

Frankly we don't have the personnel to have a good offense, which is what your quote really gets down to. But we do have some pieces. Zorn's got to address this with the front office in the off season.

These are the folllowing offensive players (or "pieces") I would like (as starters) next season:

CP
Sellers
Moss
ey
Samuels
Rabach

The rest can go.

I'm with you on the rest, but JC is going to be our starter next year, and he should be. No, he's not Brett Favre but realistically we're very unlikely to get someone better and he's improved this year between the 20s, with better blocking and a second (and hopefully third) reliable receiver he could start getting them in the end zone.

On the line, I agree those are the 2 I would keep for now and I would work on replacing the others, but realistically you don't find 3 starting caliber offensive linemen to step right in. I think we need to look at maybe bringing in a veteran guard to replace Kendall, Heyer to step in for Jansen, and the draft for a second guard to start working on replacing Thomas. But going FA to replace most of your line is unrealistic in terms of expecting to get that many quality linemen and if you do, destroying yourself for the cap. And you just don't go pick up immediately starting reliable OL in the draft beyond mid first round.

All i know is hopefully when Barak Hussein ObamaWinfrey gets inaugurated on January, he'll add playoffs to college football games and hopefully he'll acknowledge that Jason Fumble was a bust and demands Jim Zorn to sit him and put in Colt Brennan!

- Boss

Skinsfan55 wrote:Jason Campbell was having a great season up until November rolled around. He wasn't exactly in the MVP hunt but he was looking like a very good QB who was taking care of the football.

Now all of a sudden he's making stupid throws. What's different?

Jason Campbell is the most skilled QB the Redskins have had in quite some time, but he's never been allowed to learn and execute an offense, it keeps changing.

What the Redskins need to do is not change quarterbacks, but adjust the system to Campbell's strengths. If it becomes apparent that everyone is wrong and Campbell isn't going to pan out as an above average QB then we can start looking at replacements then, but Campbell sure showed some flashes of brilliance for a while.

What strengths would you be referring to? The deep balls (even when he has time) are often off the mark or severely under thrown. His short throws are often rockets with no touch and more difficult to catch than they need to be, and his accuracy on the short an intermediate routs have impacted the yac which the WCO relies on.

Now at the risk of sounding repetitive (which only seems to apply to me on this board) the obvious contradiction in the Collins versus Campbell debate of last year is this:

Campbell's pass pro wasn't good enough to allow him time to throw, and the receivers sucked, and that's why he wasn't more successful. (I can post the links to last year's extensive discussions saying this repeatedly) Then comes Collins, and after 27 minutes of Campbell's offensive futility against Chicago, boom...2 TDs in less than 4 minutes, and the offense looked totally new. Of course, immediately it was because Collins was so familiar with the offense (ignoring the fact that he hadn't actually ever started a single game in that offense or any other for that matter in 10 years. And by the way, he and Saunders were only together for 4-5 years, not 10).

But the glaring question was and still is...if that was actually true, how does Collins familiarity with the offense help the line block or help the lousy receivers catch?? After all you can't have it both ways. You can't say that magically the line got better and the receivers got better without some reason? And the only possible answer is that Collins familiarity with the offense allowed him to get the ball out of his hands quicker, defeating the pass rush. OK? Now, how does that help the receivers catch? 1) they aren't starred down by the QB, allowing DB's to close and cause those catches to be more difficult or impossible. 2) the balls were more accurate and consequently easier to catch 3) the proven ability to make those plays not only changed the defense's approach, making them back off of the full throttle rush, but also made secondaries back off a bit and not play so aggressively. As an offense begins to function efficiently, the defense must begin to react instead of attack. This changes the entire scenario from the defense dictating to the offense to the offense actually dictating to the defense (a much better position, offensively).

What does all that mean? It means that the effectiveness of your QB (for whatever reason, be it skill, familiarity with the playbook, or what have you) helps out across the board, and allows everyone's performance to improve. And likewise, the ineffectiveness of a QB also causes problems with pass blocking and pass catching too.

So, no, you can't have your cake and eat it too. The o-line and receivers didn't just miraculously become better the instant Collins came in which helped him to be more successful than Campbell. There is cause and effect that you cannot ignore in the experience of last year with Collins success.

I will concede that there is no way to predict that a switch to Collins this year would be a cure all, given the possibility that his familiarity with the offense last year was the big advantage for him (and Campbell's lack of understanding of it a big disadvantage). However true that might be, if it is, then we have a totally different problem with Campbell. One of intelligence versus ability. Either way, it's inaccurate to say that the reason Campbell isn't being successful is the o-line and receivers. Campbell has as much of a negative effect on both as they might have on him.

And since it's easier to change 1 person than it is changing 10, I suggest that a change at QB is the next logical and necessary step to answer the question..."do we or don't we have a QB problem".

Ray, you bring it strong as usual bruh....

I don't think at this point you need to change QB's. I think that Campbell should remain the starter for the rest of the season and then look at that position next year and whether or not JC is the right QB for this team and offense.

Instead of changing the QB or 10 players, wouldn't it be easier to change the play-calling??? If you do make any personnel changes would it be better, if we lose this next game, to insert Kelly and Thomas as the WR's and us Moss as the slot WR to see how that works out? I personally think that ARE was good only in Pittsburgh where they had an OLine that gave it's QB time to find him and Hines Ward.

But hey that's just what I think...

roybus14 wrote:Ray, you bring it strong as usual bruh....

I don't think at this point you need to change QB's. I think that Campbell should remain the starter for the rest of the season and then look at that position next year and whether or not JC is the right QB for this team and offense.

Instead of changing the QB or 10 players, wouldn't it be easier to change the play-calling??? If you do make any personnel changes would it be better, if we lose this next game, to insert Kelly and Thomas as the WR's and us Moss as the slot WR to see how that works out? I personally think that ARE was good only in Pittsburgh where they had an OLine that gave it's QB time to find him and Hines Ward.

But hey that's just what I think...

Roy, I agree with you on a lot of things, but I think you and many others are working with a false impression regarding our receivers. It's the old deal that a lie repeated often enough becomes the truth. The reality is that we have an excellent group of receivers in Moss, ARE , and CC. And if Devin Thomas and Kelley would get their acts together, we'd have a tremendous amount of weapons.

Let's correct the record here. ARE has 48 catches, 4 more tha Santonio Holmes, 3 more tha Braylon Edwards and Isaac Bruce, and right around the same (within 2-3 catches) of Antonio Gates, Marvin Harrison, Dallas Clark, Tory Holt. And he's behind TO by only 7 catches!!

Add Santana who has just as many catches and more yards than Randy Moss, more than TO, Donald Driver, Hines Ward

CC who has more than Santana....

The only problem here is scoring TDs. If Jason Campbell had 18-20 TD passes this year....nobody ould be griping and complaining....they'd all be busy saving money for SB tickets, because we'd be leading the NFC East and on our way.

When you look at the actual stats, we have a great running game, and one of the better WR,WR,TE trios in the league. The only thing missing are those TD passes. Santana has 5 this year, and I can remember a few missed opportunities with him beating his man deep...badly...as in easy TD's. One or two were over thrown, and a some just never thrown.

Plus, we just saw ARE go up high and snag a high TD pass against the Ravens. So he is more than capable of making plays (and throwing TDs too).

As for your question, "wouldn't it be easier to change play calling". Yes, we did that this year. And the results are the same as last year with different play calling, plays, and play caller.

The ONE thing we haven't tried this year was what proved to be successful last year. Go figure that nobody wants to try that again.

We all can see that Campbell is not getting it done as well as we all would like but to insinuate that it is all Campbell's fault is just not right. He may not be (and may never be ) a great QB but he is the best option we have - Collins would not be able to handle the game as well as Campbell with the issues we have with our offensive line. In my opinion, Brennan is just not going to be thrown in there just yet although I would prefer Brennan to Collins.

We need to play better and have better play calling - not a new QB

Imagine if Portis got the line blocking he deserves OR if Campbell got the pass protection he needs - the fault is not a matter of a player not playing well enough it lies more with the game planning and the offensive line play and schemes

RayNAustin wrote:

roybus14 wrote:Ray, you bring it strong as usual bruh....

I don't think at this point you need to change QB's. I think that Campbell should remain the starter for the rest of the season and then look at that position next year and whether or not JC is the right QB for this team and offense.

Instead of changing the QB or 10 players, wouldn't it be easier to change the play-calling??? If you do make any personnel changes would it be better, if we lose this next game, to insert Kelly and Thomas as the WR's and us Moss as the slot WR to see how that works out? I personally think that ARE was good only in Pittsburgh where they had an OLine that gave it's QB time to find him and Hines Ward.

But hey that's just what I think...

Roy, I agree with you on a lot of things, but I think you and many others are working with a false impression regarding our receivers. It's the old deal that a lie repeated often enough becomes the truth. The reality is that we have an excellent group of receivers in Moss, ARE , and CC. And if Devin Thomas and Kelley would get their acts together, we'd have a tremendous amount of weapons.

Let's correct the record here. ARE has 48 catches, 4 more tha Santonio Holmes, 3 more tha Braylon Edwards and Isaac Bruce, and right around the same (within 2-3 catches) of Antonio Gates, Marvin Harrison, Dallas Clark, Tory Holt. And he's behind TO by only 7 catches!!

Add Santana who has just as many catches and more yards than Randy Moss, more than TO, Donald Driver, Hines Ward

CC who has more than Santana....

The only problem here is scoring TDs. If Jason Campbell had 18-20 TD passes this year....nobody ould be griping and complaining....they'd all be busy saving money for SB tickets, because we'd be leading the NFC East and on our way.

When you look at the actual stats, we have a great running game, and one of the better WR,WR,TE trios in the league. The only thing missing are those TD passes. Santana has 5 this year, and I can remember a few missed opportunities with him beating his man deep...badly...as in easy TD's. One or two were over thrown, and a some just never thrown.

Plus, we just saw ARE go up high and snag a high TD pass against the Ravens. So he is more than capable of making plays (and throwing TDs too).

As for your question, "wouldn't it be easier to change play calling". Yes, we did that this year. And the results are the same as last year with different play calling, plays, and play caller.

The ONE thing we haven't tried this year was what proved to be successful last year. Go figure that nobody wants to try that again.

Wow... those are some great points you made there, Ray. Our receivers are studs and those stats you posted support your claim. The OOOOONLY thing missing, as you so cleverly point out, are those darn TD passes. Thanks, great points and very positive.

Oh wait... while you're giving credit where credit is do, you forgot to mention our best producing group pf players on the team. Our O-LINE! They have been studs all year and should be getting the Players Of The Year Awards! They've been healthy, reliable, opened huge holes for Portis and give Campbell ALL DAY to throw! Just like the Giants line gives Eli all day in the pocket, JC can sit back there and have all the time in the world to throw TD passes. Don't forget to compliment that outstanding O-line, Ray, without them, JC wouldn't be getting so much time in the pocket. Remember what they say... "it all starts up front".

JC17 deserves to finish the season out. IMO, he deserves every opportunity to prove or disprove that he has all the makings of a franchise QB.

SKINFAN wrote:JC17 deserves to finish the season out. IMO, he deserves every opportunity to prove or disprove that he has all the makings of a franchise QB.

He's earned the job into next year as well given the reality of the choices we'll have. We need to work on the rest of our offensive personnel, particularly the line and receivers. We need to determine where we can develop what we have and what we need to bring in. JC's improved a lot this year. It's normal to be able to move it between the 20s before you become effective in the Red Zone. No he's not where we need him to be, but are very few Joe Montana's out there and you don't just go out and sign one. Basically our realistic choices in the off season are:

A: Focus on personnel, development, play calling and coaching of the rest of the O while continuing to develop a good QB who's not Steve Young and never will be because even good QBs are not easy to come by at the NFL level.

B: Mortgage the team in search of a QB who's SO good he can succeed while we ignored the rest of our O because we blew the wad to get him.

A is the focus of organizations who want to win and recognize what it takes to get there. B is the focus of so called "fans" who want to win now with little knowledge of how to be successful on the field or in life in general as demonstrated by their jobs mowing lawns, greeting people in Wal-Mart and installing windows. "Fans" who think you can criticize a team to success. They are content trumpeting their dearth of knowledge by whining that they want to win now and they don't really care they have no idea what takes to be successful and constantly demonstrate that. They just criticize without content, a plan or a clue.

For God's sake, you would think we were 1-12, not 7-6. There is simply no virtue in what they are doing in any way.

I am on it. JC is clearly not the guy lets stop wasting our time. Our season is over lets see what Colt can do in game situations.

While I disagree with most of you who think Campbell is worse than the WR's, O-line, and playcalling combined, I wouldn't mind seeing Colt in there just for S and G's. Maybe not against the Eagles but perhaps the 49ers game.

bump

bravo

John Manfreda wrote:I am on it. JC is clearly not the guy lets stop wasting our time. Our season is over lets see what Colt can do in game situations.

Absolutely. Give Colt a shot with the starters and against defensive starters. What's the worse that could happen? they could lose?

I say we run the wildcat offense with ARE. Or, how about the wishbone? It's not like we're going to score any less points.

Champsturf wrote:

John Manfreda wrote:I am on it. JC is clearly not the guy lets stop wasting our time. Our season is over lets see what Colt can do in game situations.

Absolutely. Give Colt a shot with the starters and against defensive starters. What's the worse that could happen? they could lose?

I know lol

Colt, Colt, Colt, Colt

This is the perfect time to take a look at our rookie QB and give him some gametime experience.

I agree, I would love to see what we have in Colt. We need somebody who's not afraid to throw the football.

TeeterSalad wrote:I agree, I would love to see what we have in Colt. We need somebody who's not afraid to throw the football.

As many times as JC's been pummeled, I surely would be scared to run a slow developing play.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

TeeterSalad wrote:I agree, I would love to see what we have in Colt. We need somebody who's not afraid to throw the football.

As many times as JC's been pummeled, I surely would be scared to run a slow developing play.

That's not what I meant by that. I would like to see a bit more of a risk taker in choosing passes to try and complete.

TeeterSalad wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

TeeterSalad wrote:I agree, I would love to see what we have in Colt. We need somebody who's not afraid to throw the football.

As many times as JC's been pummeled, I surely would be scared to run a slow developing play.

That's not what I meant by that. I would like to see a bit more of a risk taker in choosing passes to try and complete.

Yeah, b/c Colt hasn't ben pummeled yet, so he'll take those chances. If I was a bettin man, I'd bet that Colt would be gun shy, too, after the beating JC's taken this year. I knew exactly what you were referring to.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

TeeterSalad wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

TeeterSalad wrote:I agree, I would love to see what we have in Colt. We need somebody who's not afraid to throw the football.

As many times as JC's been pummeled, I surely would be scared to run a slow developing play.

That's not what I meant by that. I would like to see a bit more of a risk taker in choosing passes to try and complete.

Yeah, b/c Colt hasn't ben pummeled yet, so he'll take those chances. If I was a bettin man, I'd bet that Colt would be gun shy, too, after the beating JC's taken this year. I knew exactly what you were referring to.

JC gets pummeled half the time because he doesn't take those chances I am referring to, he holds on to the ball and waits until he has a dump off man. Colt has a tendancy to move the pocket and make quick decisions (from what I've seen of him.)

TeeterSalad wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

TeeterSalad wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

TeeterSalad wrote:I agree, I would love to see what we have in Colt. We need somebody who's not afraid to throw the football.

As many times as JC's been pummeled, I surely would be scared to run a slow developing play.

That's not what I meant by that. I would like to see a bit more of a risk taker in choosing passes to try and complete.

Yeah, b/c Colt hasn't ben pummeled yet, so he'll take those chances. If I was a bettin man, I'd bet that Colt would be gun shy, too, after the beating JC's taken this year. I knew exactly what you were referring to.

JC gets pummeled half the time because he doesn't take those chances I am referring to, he holds on to the ball and waits until he has a dump off man. Colt has a tendancy to move the pocket and make quick decisions (from what I've seen of him.)

The o-line is quite subpar. That is amajor factor in JC's success (or lack thereof).

VetSkinsFan wrote:

TeeterSalad wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

TeeterSalad wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

TeeterSalad wrote:I agree, I would love to see what we have in Colt. We need somebody who's not afraid to throw the football.

As many times as JC's been pummeled, I surely would be scared to run a slow developing play.

That's not what I meant by that. I would like to see a bit more of a risk taker in choosing passes to try and complete.

Yeah, b/c Colt hasn't ben pummeled yet, so he'll take those chances. If I was a bettin man, I'd bet that Colt would be gun shy, too, after the beating JC's taken this year. I knew exactly what you were referring to.

JC gets pummeled half the time because he doesn't take those chances I am referring to, he holds on to the ball and waits until he has a dump off man. Colt has a tendancy to move the pocket and make quick decisions (from what I've seen of him.)

The o-line is quite subpar. That is amajor factor in JC's success (or lack thereof).

Can't disagree with you there.

Who knows what JC could do with more time, we won't find out this season thats for sure. That's why I'd like to see Brennan run around back there and see what he can do, if anything.

It can't get too much worse at this point.

I've been a huge JC supporter for years (even calling for him to start over Brunnell in '06), but after yesterday's game, I'm just not sure anymore. Granted, the line is atrocious, but he's just not doing much back there. At this point, with the season basically over, I wouldn't mind seeing what Colt's got.