Page 2 of 4
Posted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:18 pm
by Irn-Bru
SnyderSucks wrote:Campbell is the only option on the roster with any chance of winning for a full season this year. Advocating for Collins, Brennan, or Daniel is like advocating that the team start Mike Williams at right tackle because you don't think Heyer is good enough. You could be correct about the starter not being great, but that doesn't make the backup a better option.
Exactly. Well stated.
Posted: Tue Aug 25, 2009 1:57 pm
by roybus14
I think it's too early to tell whether or not JC is going to be great or bad. Preseason is just that, preseason. I don't put much stock in it. Now if we are at week three and we are 0-3 or 1-3 and JC is playing horrible, there is cause for concern. But we've haven't even played a real game yet and already, folks are throwing him under the bus.
Time will tell so let it ride. It would be smart at this point because what will be said if we are rolling into November-December with only 2-3 losses??
Posted: Tue Aug 25, 2009 2:47 pm
by ChocolateMilk
roybus14 wrote:I think it's too early to tell whether or not JC is going to be great or bad. Preseason is just that, preseason. I don't put much stock in it. Now if we are at week three and we are 0-3 or 1-3 and JC is playing horrible, there is cause for concern. But we've haven't even played a real game yet and already, folks are throwing him under the bus.
Time will tell so let it ride. It would be smart at this point because what will be said if we are rolling into November-December with only 2-3 losses??
I concur
Posted: Tue Aug 25, 2009 11:40 pm
by skinsfan#33
SnyderSucks wrote:[If you put Collins in for those same plays, the results would have been even worse. Collins could not even attempt the two deep balls. The two intentionally grounded would have still be grounded. The six yard scramble would have been a sack. The incompletion to Davis would have still been incomplete and might have been picked due to a slower delivery. The ball to Moss is likely to have been completed, but might have been picked also. With Collins, you might have gotten 2-7 with a sack and one or two picks. With Campbell, you got 1-7 with a scramble and no TO's, and a drive that should have been a TD if the fullback blocked properly.
There is no way you or anyone could make that assumption. I could just as easily said, Collins would have hit both Moss and Kelly for TDs and threw the pass earlier to Moss when there was a window to throw it through instead of risking a pick and hanging Moss out to dry on an unrealistically high throw.
I might be right, you might be right, or neither. All I do know is in 9 pass attempts last week, Campbell had the oppurtunity to throw two TDs and hit Moss for a big third down convertion, but he through teriblt balls in each case!
That, my friend, is the ONLY thing we know! He had the chance to make 3 big plays and hosed them all up!!!!!
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 8:41 am
by SkinsJock
skinsfan#33 wrote:SnyderSucks wrote:[If you put Collins in for those same plays, the results would have been even worse. Collins could not even attempt the two deep balls. The two intentionally grounded would have still be grounded. The six yard scramble would have been a sack. The incompletion to Davis would have still been incomplete and might have been picked due to a slower delivery. The ball to Moss is likely to have been completed, but might have been picked also. With Collins, you might have gotten 2-7 with a sack and one or two picks. With Campbell, you got 1-7 with a scramble and no TO's, and a drive that should have been a TD if the fullback blocked properly.
There is no way you or anyone could make that assumption. I could just as easily said, Collins would have hit both Moss and Kelly for TDs and threw the pass earlier to Moss when there was a window to throw it through instead of risking a pick and hanging Moss out to dry on an unrealistically high throw.
I might be right, you might be right, or neither. All I do know is in 9 pass attempts last week, Campbell had the oppurtunity to throw two TDs and hit Moss for a big third down convertion, but he through teriblt balls in each case!
That, my friend, is the ONLY thing we know! He had the chance to make 3 big plays and hosed them all up!!!!!
the most important thing we know is that Zorn is going to make the choice for who gives him the best chance for success and
that decision will not be based on stats - this is NOT baseball
No matter what the circumstances, during the regular season, coaches always try to play the players, at any position, that gives the team the best chance to win the game
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 9:42 am
by SkinsFreak
SkinsJock wrote:the most important thing we know is that Zorn is going to make the choice for who gives him the best chance for success and
that decision will not be based on stats - this is NOT baseball
No matter what the circumstances, during the regular season, coaches always try to play the players, at any position, that gives the team the best chance to win the game
I completely agree, SJ.
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 12:49 pm
by RayNAustin
SnyderSucks wrote:
No. 13 passes aren't enough to judge compared to hundreds so far in practice. I did a post on another thread that analyzed each called pass play from the last game. It's clear if you look beyond the numbers that other factors influence performance. In 9 called pass plays, Campbell had 2 completions (1 nullified by penalty to Samuels), and a six yard scramble. Two of the incompletions were thrown into the ground intentionally because the defense had the play shut down. The incompletion to Davis was because Davis ran the route improperly, not Campbell. So that's 6 good plays. The two long balls should be 50% completion, so give Campbell one bad play there. The incompletion to Moss was all Cambell, so another bad play there. On 9 passing plays, Campbell made the right decision and executed it 6 times, while only failing to execute twice. He also failed to have any balls interecepted because he has the equivalent armstrenth of wet pasta, as Collins did.
If you put Collins in for those same plays, the results would have been even worse.
Collins could not even attempt the two deep balls. The two intentionally grounded would have still be grounded. The six yard scramble would have been a sack. The incompletion to Davis would have still been incomplete and might have been picked due to a slower delivery. The ball to Moss is likely to have been completed, but might have been picked also. With Collins, you might have gotten 2-7 with a sack and one or two picks. With Campbell, you got 1-7 with a scramble and no TO's, and a drive that should have been a TD if the fullback blocked properly.
YOU nor ANYONE ELSE could possibly know that. There are multiple options on each play, and another QB, be it Collins or anyone else might not even take the exact same options on any given play. What no body talks about is the propensity (self admitted) to check down after the first progression because of lack of time (or more accurately, going through progressions too slowly to go through all three before checking down).
But, let's just say that even if you were proven correct, the difference between 1 for 7 and 10 yards and 0 for 7 and zero yards isn't risking very much.
SnyderSucks wrote:
If you want to use statistics, that is fine, but you have to have a large enough sample size for statistics to mean anything. A sample size of 7, 9 or 13 is statistically insignificant when you are talking about a season where the QB will make several hundred throws. I can show you stats of Danny Wuerrfel from the preseason that make him look like the second coming of Joe Montana.
I agree with you that statistics don't tell the whole story. Preseason stats are even more dubious than regular season stats. But that's really all WE have to debate ... that and the results we see on the field.
And I'm not judging Campbell on a few passes in 2 preseason games in 2009, that's ridiculous. I'm looking at the entire picture ... and the ONE statistic that troubles me the most is that when Campbell is the starting QB, we lose more games than we win. His record is 15-20 from 2006-2008. And spare me all of the excuses .. everybody is judged on wins and losses, and I doubt anyone could point to 5 games during that stretch that Jason Campbell played superbly and still lost?
Contrast that with Collins 4-1 record, and I'm not certain how so many can simply ignore that tiny detail.
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 1:35 pm
by Paralis
Todd Collins was a free agent at the end of the 2007 season. Maybe the Rams thought he was a better backup than Jamie Martin, and maybe the Jaguars thought he was a better backup than Quinn Gray.
But 32 out of 32 NFL GMs had the chance to sign Todd Collins to at least compete to be a starting quarterback, and not a single one did.
What he did in 2007 was great, but it's not like it's Vinny Cerrato that's holding him back. If anybody thought Collins could start 16 games, he wouldn't be a Redskin.
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 1:36 pm
by PulpExposure
RayNAustin wrote:the ONE statistic that troubles me the most is that when Campbell is the starting QB, we lose more games than we win. His record is 15-20 from 2006-2008. And spare me all of the excuses .. everybody is judged on wins and losses
You must be ecstatic that we didn't get Cutler, then...because Cutler has a losing record in the NFL (17-20), and in college.
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 1:39 pm
by SkinsJock
RayNAustin wrote:
I agree with you that statistics don't tell the whole story. Preseason stats are even more dubious than regular season stats. But that's really all WE have to debate ... that and the results we see on the field.
And I'm not judging Campbell on a few passes in 2 preseason games in 2009, that's ridiculous. I'm looking at the entire picture ... and the ONE statistic that troubles me the most is that when Campbell is the starting QB, we lose more games than we win. His record is 15-20 from 2006-2008. And spare me all of the excuses .. everybody is judged on wins and losses, and I doubt anyone could point to 5 games during that stretch that Jason Campbell played superbly and still lost?
Contrast that with Collins 4-1 record, and I'm not certain how so many can simply ignore that tiny detail.
You know Ray - with all of his so called potential, I wonder why other teams have not been trying to make a deal to get Collins onto their team?
OR are you implying that we have not returned all the calls to enquire about this hidden gem of a QB because they feel that we might need to hold onto Collins in case Campbell doesn't make it
I think that if one team had called and wanted to know if Collins was available, despite his incredible W/L stats, we would not be having this discussion
kind of makes me wonder if all those other teams know how much potential Collins has too
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 1:55 pm
by KazooSkinsFan
SkinsJock wrote:You know Ray - with all of his so called potential, I wonder why other teams have not been trying to make a deal to get Collins onto their team?
OR are you implying that we have not returned all the calls to enquire about this hidden gem of a QB because they feel that we might need to hold onto Collins in case Campbell doesn't make it
I think that if one team had called and wanted to know if Collins was available, despite his incredible W/L stats, we would not be having this discussion
kind of makes me wonder if all those other teams know how much potential Collins has too
Please, Ray
watched the games on his TV. If our coaches are too stupid to see in practice and on tape what Ray saw sitting on his sofa that's not his problem. That the half the NFL with dubious or sucky quarterbacks can't be bothered to watch tapes of him winning 4 in a row and taking us to the playoffs on his shoulder and recognize he was worth pursuing in free agency to replace their own starter just shows they can't recognize talent either.
Ray
watched the games. He
has a TV and knows how to use it. He knows. I for one believe him.
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 1:57 pm
by RayNAustin
SkinsFreak wrote:SkinsJock wrote:the most important thing we know is that Zorn is going to make the choice for who gives him the best chance for success and
that decision will not be based on stats - this is NOT baseball
No matter what the circumstances, during the regular season, coaches always try to play the players, at any position, that gives the team the best chance to win the game
I completely agree, SJ.
In theory, that may be true, and so long as you have total confidence in the judgement and expertise of a second year head coach, that would be a solid philosophy.
And in order to separate opinion from fact, I'll say that my reservations about this coaches judgement are just an opinion. Campbell may clearly be the appropriate choice. Yet I can't help but recall the decision to keep Campbell as the starter in 2007 after a 6 game stretch leading up to the Chicago game when JC was injured. To refresh one's memory, we lost 5 out of those 6, and the 1 win Campbell still played poorly. Portis ran for almost 200 yards in that game and we won by 3 points, I think.
Given such a dramatic turnaround from 1-5 to 4-0, demonstrates that Campbell MAY not have been the best choice at that particular time with that particular system under those particular conditions. And the coaches then were Joe Gibbs (whom I hold in much higher regard than Zorn) and Saunders who personally knew and worked with Collins for a number of years.
Saunders even admitted that although he knew Collins was a capable player and was not concerned to have him in there, he was caught by surprise by how well he ran the offense. And 4 games is no fluke.
Therefore, could it not be remotely possible that Zorn may be discounting the quality of his backup QB, since more experienced coaches before him did that very thing? Or is that just too irrational to consider, seeing is how they are experts and we are just stupid fans who really have no clue about such complex things?
Just not a possibility, aye? Father knows best.
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 2:00 pm
by RayNAustin
KazooSkinsFan wrote:SkinsJock wrote:You know Ray - with all of his so called potential, I wonder why other teams have not been trying to make a deal to get Collins onto their team?
OR are you implying that we have not returned all the calls to enquire about this hidden gem of a QB because they feel that we might need to hold onto Collins in case Campbell doesn't make it
I think that if one team had called and wanted to know if Collins was available, despite his incredible W/L stats, we would not be having this discussion
kind of makes me wonder if all those other teams know how much potential Collins has too
Please, Ray
watched the games on his TV. If our coaches are too stupid to see in practice and on tape what Ray saw sitting on his sofa that's not his problem. That the half the NFL with dubious or sucky quarterbacks can't be bothered to watch tapes of him winning 4 in a row and taking us to the playoffs on his shoulder and recognize he was worth pursuing in free agency to replace their own starter just shows they can't recognize talent either.
Ray
watched the games. He
has a TV and knows how to use it. He knows. I for one believe him.
I just looked at the record. And out of 35 games, Campbell has won 15 of them. Not exactly a knee jerk reaction.
And your snotty remarks won't change a thing. It just shows your immaturity.
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 2:00 pm
by KazooSkinsFan
RayNAustin wrote:Saunders even admitted that although he knew Collins was a capable player and was not concerned to have him in there, he was caught by surprise by how well he ran the offense. And 4 games is no fluke
It's not like he was a backup for his entire career because anyone thought he could actually come in and back up the starter, is it Ray? I'm starting to get it now...
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 2:04 pm
by RayNAustin
KazooSkinsFan wrote:RayNAustin wrote:Saunders even admitted that although he knew Collins was a capable player and was not concerned to have him in there, he was caught by surprise by how well he ran the offense. And 4 games is no fluke
It's not like he was a backup for his entire career because anyone thought he could actually come in and back up the starter, is it Ray? I'm starting to get it now...
I know this is tough, but he backed up two Pro Bowl QBs in KC for 8 years. So it's not a mystery to me why he didn't play.
What is a mystery to me is how difficult that is for some to grasp.
And, by the way, you should remove that little diddy about "if everyone is thinking the same thing ... somebody isn't thinking "
It's false advertising. You surely don't believe that because you insult anyone who doesn't agree with the consensus opinion.
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 2:06 pm
by KazooSkinsFan
RayNAustin wrote:I just looked at the record. And out of 35 games, Campbell has won 15 of them. Not exactly a knee jerk reaction
And your reply is not a realistic, balanced assessments of our actual options, either
RayNAustin wrote:And your snotty remarks won't change a thing. It just shows your immaturity.
Bam! Thank you for acknowledging I'm getting to you. This is what you've got. Blood in the water...
You're not a stupid man, Ray. But you're way overestimating the quality of your points. For the forcefulness of your views, your support for that everyone is wrong but you is just weak.
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 2:09 pm
by KazooSkinsFan
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 2:12 pm
by KazooSkinsFan
Thanks Ray, I'm still laughing. I needed a good one today....
BTW, I corrected the sig per your instructions...
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 2:31 pm
by RayNAustin
KazooSkinsFan wrote:RayNAustin wrote:I just looked at the record. And out of 35 games, Campbell has won 15 of them. Not exactly a knee jerk reaction
And your reply is not a realistic, balanced assessments of our actual options, either
RayNAustin wrote:And your snotty remarks won't change a thing. It just shows your immaturity.
Bam! Thank you for acknowledging I'm getting to you. This is what you've got. Blood in the water...
You're not a stupid man, Ray. But you're way overestimating the quality of your points. For the forcefulness of your views, your support for that everyone is wrong but you is just weak.
No, I've already been right. When you ... YES YOU ..(don't make me dredge up the 100's of old posts) and the majority still held the belief that Campbell was a Pro Bowl quality, Franchise QB and the long term future of the Redskins, I said bologna.
Going into 2008, when I said Collins and Campbell should compete for the starting job, the majority said NONSENSE. And boy, were you all riding high and high fiving in the first half of the year.
Then the wheels flew off, and everyone ran for the bag of excuses that upon close inspection said (expiration date 12-31-07).
Let's see now Kaz
1) Do you still believe Campbell is a Pro Bowl QB ?
2) Do you still believe Campbell is a "Franchise" NFL QB
3) Do you still believe Campbell is an excellent Starting NFL QB
4) Do you believe he is the future of the Redskin franchise?
No matter how you cherry pick an irrelevant point here or there, YOU WERE DEAD WRONG about Jason Campbell, you know it, and I know it. You just can't bring yourself to say so.
What a terrible hardship it must be for you ... to be so terrified to admit being wrong while being wrong so often.
As one fellow human being to another, if it makes you feel better, I'll just agree that you're right and I'm wrong. OK Buddy?
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 3:08 pm
by KazooSkinsFan
RayNAustin wrote:No matter how you cherry pick an irrelevant point here or there, YOU WERE DEAD WRONG about Jason Campbell, you know it, and I know it. You just can't bring yourself to say so.
Since I never believed JC was a "Pro Bowl" or "Franchise" or "excellent starting" or "future of the Redskin Franchise" QB, I can't logically address if I "still believe" what I never more then hoped for. I do believe though that you'd pass a lie detector test that you remember it that way.
On another subject, is there any truth to the rumor someone reading your posts on THN was inspired to write this South Park episode? Just wondering.
http://ccinsider.comedycentral.com/2009 ... joke-ever/
Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:19 am
by FanofallthatisGibbs
I miss Gus Ferrotte
Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 7:05 am
by RayNAustin
KazooSkinsFan wrote:RayNAustin wrote:No matter how you cherry pick an irrelevant point here or there, YOU WERE DEAD WRONG about Jason Campbell, you know it, and I know it. You just can't bring yourself to say so.
Since I never believed JC was a "Pro Bowl" or "Franchise" or "excellent starting" or "future of the Redskin Franchise" QB, I can't logically address if I "still believe" what I never more then hoped for. I do believe though that you'd pass a lie detector test that you remember it that way.
On another subject, is there any truth to the rumor someone reading your posts on THN was inspired to write this South Park episode? Just wondering.
http://ccinsider.comedycentral.com/2009 ... joke-ever/
My memory of past discussions with you have rarely (never) resulted in agreement. And since my opinions of JC's capabilities have remained consistent, it is you who's recollection appears conveniently faulty
Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:38 am
by SkinsJock
"Campbell's ability and comparison to other QBs" - I don't know why, but it seems to me that this thread has become more about whether anyone was right or wrong in their assessment of Campbell than about Campbell and his talent or capability to be a good QB in the NFL
I don't really think that some here at THN (maybe 1 or 2) ever thought that Campbell was going to be a really good QB - sure, we all hoped and thought that Campbell might become a good QB - after all he was selected by Gibbs, but that has not really transpired. We all wanted him to be able to lead the team but to say that he's not worth continuing to support and hope that he can finally show that he's got "it" or not AND to claim that you are "right" about thinking that 2 or 3 years ago is just pointless.
A lot of QBs don't make the transition - It happens - we still really do not know if he's not going to be even a good QB but I do know that he's going to be given every chance here and as soon as Zorn thinks the team will be better served by making a change, I think that will happen. That could be even before the season begins
Campbell, in my opinion just does not have the intangibles BUT at the same time I think that Campbell is better than a lot of other QBs presently playing in the NFL and at this time he looks like he's going to be our starting QB and the guy that we should support.
we can discuss the ups and downs of our players, coaches and management, which we do, passionately, but, to say "I am right you all are wrong" and beat your own drum over an opinion as a fan is just a little petty in my opinion
Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 11:38 am
by KazooSkinsFan
RayNAustin wrote:My memory of past discussions with you have rarely (never) resulted in agreement. And since my opinions of JC's capabilities have remained consistent, it is you who's recollection appears conveniently faulty
Wow, that logic makes sense. I think you got me on that one.
Thanks for the laugh. However, I never thought JC was a sure thing and obviously still don't as I'm predicting it's his last hurrah with us. As we all know (Heath, Leaf, ...) even top QBs are no sure thing and he was a late first rounder. While I didn't give up on his potential, and still have a glimmer of hope, I have never felt he actually delivered to give me any actual belief he WILL make it as our long term solution. You can read every post I wrote since we drafted him and you won't find one that contradicts that. Sure, I argued for his potential, but I've never said he's the guy, not once, not ever.
Anyway, it's DC. We hate our starter, but look at how "we" were carried away last year with 6th rounder Colt and this year with undrafted rookie Chase based on what? Almost nothing. Then there's the hysteria over Todd who couldn't get a starting role after taking us to the playoffs, but we're STILL too stupid to play an aging backup who never was an is.
I guarantee you 5 years from now we'll be having the same conversations about other quarterbacks with different names, it's part of being a Skins fan.
Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 12:23 pm
by Deadskins
KazooSkinsFan wrote:who never was an is.
What the hell does this even mean?
