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

John Manfreda wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

John Manfreda wrote:

Countertrey wrote:

John Manfreda wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:Correction: if I'm not mistaken, didn't we spend 2 1st round picks on Campbell?

No. In 2005, we traded our 2006 1st, 2005's 3rd, and 2006's 4th to move up to get Campbell.

FYI that 2006 4th turned out to be Brandon Marshall. Ouch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Campbell
now his career stats are gone. Wow that website must have been giving out great information, why did they take it away. I guess it wasn't reliable.

Yet, you see fit to use it...

I never use it, it was the staff that used it. Get your facts straight.

The staf uzed teh trade informashion. You used the Jason Cambpell career stats informashion. Two different pages.

same website and that shows that the website they used isn't reliable so I do not believe them one bit. Use reliable cites.

markshark84 wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:Correction: if I'm not mistaken, didn't we spend 2 1st round picks on Campbell?

No. In 2005, we traded our 2006 1st, 2005's 3rd, and 2006's 4th to move up to get Campbell.

FYI that 2006 4th turned out to be Brandon Marshall. Ouch.

Pulp, there were a couple good players selected after the 4th round in that year. Come on now. That is a horrible arguement or point or whatever you were trying to say.

John Manfreda wrote:You sticking up for him is the stupidest thing I have ever seen.

John Manfreda wrote:[same website and that shows that the website they used isn't reliable so I do not believe them one bit. Use reliable cites.

With most NFL analysts believing this weekend's draft is one of the weakest in memory, the Washington Redskins yesterday surprisingly traded their No. 1 pick next season and two other picks to the Denver Broncos for the 25th overall selection Saturday.

The Broncos will also get Washington's third-round pick this season and its fourth-round pick in 2006. The deal leaves the Redskins with only two picks on Saturday: the ninth and 25th.

PulpExposure wrote:

John Manfreda wrote:You sticking up for him is the stupidest thing I have ever seen.

Perhaps if you had any reading comprehension, you would understand I'm not "sticking up for him."

In fact, I've called for an open QB competition next year multiple times. How is that "sticking up for him." Find me a post that I've made that says, without any qualification, that Campbell should be our starting QB in 2009.

John Manfreda wrote:[same website and that shows that the website they used isn't reliable so I do not believe them one bit. Use reliable cites.

Sure, we can play this game

With most NFL analysts believing this weekend's draft is one of the weakest in memory, the Washington Redskins yesterday surprisingly traded their No. 1 pick next season and two other picks to the Denver Broncos for the 25th overall selection Saturday.

The Broncos will also get Washington's third-round pick this season and its fourth-round pick in 2006. The deal leaves the Redskins with only two picks on Saturday: the ninth and 25th.

So...how about a cite to that Joe Gibbs quote you remember?

John Manfreda wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:

John Manfreda wrote:You sticking up for him is the stupidest thing I have ever seen.

Perhaps if you had any reading comprehension, you would understand I'm not "sticking up for him."

In fact, I've called for an open QB competition next year multiple times. How is that "sticking up for him." Find me a post that I've made that says, without any qualification, that Campbell should be our starting QB in 2009.

John Manfreda wrote:[same website and that shows that the website they used isn't reliable so I do not believe them one bit. Use reliable cites.

Sure, we can play this game

With most NFL analysts believing this weekend's draft is one of the weakest in memory, the Washington Redskins yesterday surprisingly traded their No. 1 pick next season and two other picks to the Denver Broncos for the 25th overall selection Saturday.

The Broncos will also get Washington's third-round pick this season and its fourth-round pick in 2006. The deal leaves the Redskins with only two picks on Saturday: the ninth and 25th.

So...how about a cite to that Joe Gibbs quote you remember?

You haven't proved anything the analysts are so on top of things, there always right to. Wow, you know, why aren't these guys on TV and in the war room. You post the most up surd things ever, your reading comprehension isn't very good. That happened even though you did not cite it, proving my point once again, you are not very reliable whats the difference between me not citing something and you citing something that isn't credible. The answer is nothing so don't tell me to cite something again when you are not citing credible resources. You are not sticking up for him, the way your coming after me, certainly contradicts what you say. If you weren't sticking up for him, you wouldn't have responded to my post. And wouldn't have cared if we got rid of him one way or the other. In reality I am talking to JC's agent, or Dan Snyder in disguise. Your just like the Transformers. Pulp Exsposure Dan Snyder in disguise. Or Pulp Exsposure JC's agent in disguise.

PulpExposure wrote:

John Manfreda wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:

John Manfreda wrote:You sticking up for him is the stupidest thing I have ever seen.

Perhaps if you had any reading comprehension, you would understand I'm not "sticking up for him."

In fact, I've called for an open QB competition next year multiple times. How is that "sticking up for him." Find me a post that I've made that says, without any qualification, that Campbell should be our starting QB in 2009.

John Manfreda wrote:[same website and that shows that the website they used isn't reliable so I do not believe them one bit. Use reliable cites.

I know I am laughing too, I am talking to JC's agent.

Sure, we can play this game

With most NFL analysts believing this weekend's draft is one of the weakest in memory, the Washington Redskins yesterday surprisingly traded their No. 1 pick next season and two other picks to the Denver Broncos for the 25th overall selection Saturday.

The Broncos will also get Washington's third-round pick this season and its fourth-round pick in 2006. The deal leaves the Redskins with only two picks on Saturday: the ninth and 25th.

So...how about a cite to that Joe Gibbs quote you remember?

You haven't proved anything the analysts are so on top of things, there always right to. Wow, you know, why aren't these guys on TV and in the war room. You post the most up surd things ever, your reading comprehension isn't very good. That happened even though you did not cite it, proving my point once again, you are not very reliable whats the difference between me not citing something and you citing something that isn't credible. The answer is nothing so don't tell me to cite something again when you are not citing credible resources. You are not sticking up for him, the way your coming after me, certainly contradicts what you say. If you weren't sticking up for him, you wouldn't have responded to my post. And wouldn't have cared if we got rid of him one way or the other. In reality I am talking to JC's agent, or Dan Snyder in disguise. Your just like the Transformers. Pulp Exsposure Dan Snyder in disguise. Or Pulp Exsposure JC's agent in disguise.

Redskins.com wrote:Jason Campbell is on the verge of setting a new team mark for lowest interception percentage in a season.

Campbell has thrown 476 passes with just six interceptions, a 1.26 percentage. That would best the previous mark of 1.60 set by Mark Brunell in 2006.

Fios wrote:

markshark84 wrote:Oh, sorry. Still getting a kick out of the VC reference. As if his opinion is one of worth. I'm still waiting for an Isaih reference. I would love one. What does Isaih think of JC. If he is a go, it is FACT that JC is the best QB in the NFL right now.

Who is Isaih?

markshark84 wrote:Seriously though, I think that what you are missing completely is the fact that JC has shown absolutely NO improvement and even CONSIDERING him to be potentially a championship-caliber QB is idiotic and boarders on insanity. He sites fumbles???? What???? I care about points scored, passing yards, passing rating, you know --- the stats that MATTER. The funniest part is the "how do you know" quote. Priceless. I swear VC is a straight up baffoon.

First, if you want to call someone a buffoon you should, you know, spell it correctly. Secondly, this:

http://www.nfl.com/players/jasoncampbel ... =CAM375235

You'll note his passer rating, completion percentage and yards have gone up -- also known as improved -- each year. I know though, it's easier to engage in hyperbole than actual facts. Note, I'm not saying I think the world of JC, in fact I think his ceiling is lower than I did at the start of the season. But you said: "I care about points scored, passing yards, passing rating, you know --- the stats that MATTER." and then failed to note the improvement in 2 of the 3 stats that MATTER.

SkinsFreak wrote:

Redskins.com wrote:Jason Campbell is on the verge of setting a new team mark for lowest interception percentage in a season.

Campbell has thrown 476 passes with just six interceptions, a 1.26 percentage. That would best the previous mark of 1.60 set by Mark Brunell in 2006.

NOOOOOO!!! THIS CAN'T BE TRUE! CAMPBELL IS THE "WROST" QB SINCE SHULER!!!

Champsturf wrote:

SkinsFreak wrote:

Redskins.com wrote:Jason Campbell is on the verge of setting a new team mark for lowest interception percentage in a season.

Campbell has thrown 476 passes with just six interceptions, a 1.26 percentage. That would best the previous mark of 1.60 set by Mark Brunell in 2006.

NOOOOOO!!! THIS CAN'T BE TRUE! CAMPBELL IS THE "WROST" QB SINCE SHULER!!!

Really? You post this? Who gives a crap about lowest INT % when you're comparing dink and dunkers? Is it me, or is it kind of hard to throw an INT if you don't take a chance and throw the ball actually past the first down marker?

Now I'm not saying he's the worst QB since Shuler, but he really isn't very good...at all. I don't care how much some people say that he's improved, because he still can't score any points. If it weren't for Portis being the stud that he was at the beginning of the season, Campbell would've looked about as good then as he has the latter half of the season. Teams had a reason to to allow Campbell to throw, they had to defend Portis. now, they all seem to know that with Portis hurt and Campbell unwilling to throw over their collective heads, they can (and should) still try to defend the ailing Portis. I find it somewhat amusing that Defenses find an injured Portis more of a threat than a healthy Campbell.

Champsturf wrote:

SkinsFreak wrote:

Redskins.com wrote:Jason Campbell is on the verge of setting a new team mark for lowest interception percentage in a season.

Campbell has thrown 476 passes with just six interceptions, a 1.26 percentage. That would best the previous mark of 1.60 set by Mark Brunell in 2006.

NOOOOOO!!! THIS CAN'T BE TRUE! CAMPBELL IS THE "WROST" QB SINCE SHULER!!!

Really? You post this? Who gives a crap about lowest INT % when you're comparing dink and dunkers? Is it me, or is it kind of hard to throw an INT if you don't take a chance and throw the ball actually past the first down marker?

Now I'm not saying he's the worst QB since Shuler, but he really isn't very good...at all. I don't care how much some people say that he's improved, because he still can't score any points. If it weren't for Portis being the stud that he was at the beginning of the season, Campbell would've looked about as good then as he has the latter half of the season. Teams had a reason to to allow Campbell to throw, they had to defend Portis. now, they all seem to know that with Portis hurt and Campbell unwilling to throw over their collective heads, they can (and should) still try to defend the ailing Portis. I find it somewhat amusing that Defenses find an injured Portis more of a threat than a healthy Campbell.

PulpExposure wrote:Zorn has improved his mechanics, but he hasn't done much at the tail end of this year to show that he's a much better QB than he was.

As SkinsFreak posted earlier...you run an open QB competition, and let the best man win. It's not inconceivable that Campbell will get better with the offense, and feel more confident (i.e., take more shots downfield) once he spends more than 1 year starting in the same system.

It's also not inconceivable that Brennan fits the system better than Campbell and wins the job.

SkinsFreak wrote:

Champsturf wrote:

SkinsFreak wrote:

Redskins.com wrote:Jason Campbell is on the verge of setting a new team mark for lowest interception percentage in a season.

Campbell has thrown 476 passes with just six interceptions, a 1.26 percentage. That would best the previous mark of 1.60 set by Mark Brunell in 2006.

:shock: :shock: NOOOOOO!!! THIS CAN'T BE TRUE! CAMPBELL IS THE "WROST" QB SINCE SHULER!!! :explode:

Really? You post this? Who gives a crap about lowest INT % when you're comparing dink and dunkers? Is it me, or is it kind of hard to throw an INT if you don't take a chance and throw the ball actually past the first down marker?

Now I'm not saying he's the worst QB since Shuler, but he really isn't very good...at all. I don't care how much some people say that he's improved, because he still can't score any points. If it weren't for Portis being the stud that he was at the beginning of the season, Campbell would've looked about as good then as he has the latter half of the season. Teams had a reason to to allow Campbell to throw, they had to defend Portis. now, they all seem to know that with Portis hurt and Campbell unwilling to throw over their collective heads, they can (and should) still try to defend the ailing Portis. I find it somewhat amusing that Defenses find an injured Portis more of a threat than a healthy Campbell.

I was simply citing another area of improvement for JC, along with the points of improvement Fios posted... and also making a joke with it. Only one QB, Jeff Garcia, has thrown less Int's this year... one less Int. Now, in no way did I anoint JC to the HoF with that post, just sharing some facts regarding an area of improvement. He is improving, so it's not inconceivable that he will continue to improve. That doesn't mean you don't give Colt a look, as I've said a gazillion times before.

But I still go along and agree with what PulpExposure said several pages ago...

PulpExposure wrote:Zorn has improved his mechanics, but he hasn't done much at the tail end of this year to show that he's a much better QB than he was.

As SkinsFreak posted earlier...you run an open QB competition, and let the best man win. It's not inconceivable that Campbell will get better with the offense, and feel more confident (i.e., take more shots downfield) once he spends more than 1 year starting in the same system.

It's also not inconceivable that Brennan fits the system better than Campbell and wins the job.

DaRealistJoka wrote:

SkinsFreak wrote:

Champsturf wrote:

SkinsFreak wrote:

Redskins.com wrote:Jason Campbell is on the verge of setting a new team mark for lowest interception percentage in a season.

Campbell has thrown 476 passes with just six interceptions, a 1.26 percentage. That would best the previous mark of 1.60 set by Mark Brunell in 2006.

NOOOOOO!!! THIS CAN'T BE TRUE! CAMPBELL IS THE "WROST" QB SINCE SHULER!!!

Really? You post this? Who gives a crap about lowest INT % when you're comparing dink and dunkers? Is it me, or is it kind of hard to throw an INT if you don't take a chance and throw the ball actually past the first down marker?

Now I'm not saying he's the worst QB since Shuler, but he really isn't very good...at all. I don't care how much some people say that he's improved, because he still can't score any points. If it weren't for Portis being the stud that he was at the beginning of the season, Campbell would've looked about as good then as he has the latter half of the season. Teams had a reason to to allow Campbell to throw, they had to defend Portis. now, they all seem to know that with Portis hurt and Campbell unwilling to throw over their collective heads, they can (and should) still try to defend the ailing Portis. I find it somewhat amusing that Defenses find an injured Portis more of a threat than a healthy Campbell.

I was simply citing another area of improvement for JC, along with the points of improvement Fios posted... and also making a joke with it. Only one QB, Jeff Garcia, has thrown less Int's this year... one less Int. Now, in no way did I anoint JC to the HoF with that post, just sharing some facts regarding an area of improvement. He is improving, so it's not inconceivable that he will continue to improve. That doesn't mean you don't give Colt a look, as I've said a gazillion times before.

But I still go along and agree with what PulpExposure said several pages ago...

PulpExposure wrote:Zorn has improved his mechanics, but he hasn't done much at the tail end of this year to show that he's a much better QB than he was.

As SkinsFreak posted earlier...you run an open QB competition, and let the best man win. It's not inconceivable that Campbell will get better with the offense, and feel more confident (i.e., take more shots downfield) once he spends more than 1 year starting in the same system.

It's also not inconceivable that Brennan fits the system better than Campbell and wins the job.

I agree with you, I was just arguing with a friend about this, I told him that Campbell might be a Garcia type QB in this league, were he will not put up big numbers, take care of the football , and make crucial plays with his feet. I believe people want a Brees, Manning, and Tom type QB. Every QB is not going to be that caliber.

Has Campbell really had a fair shot? He has had 3 different Coordinators. I don’t see how any QB can be that comfortable to play at a level he needs to play at. Plus looking at his stats he has improved every year. It is funny to come on here, and read the non sense people write. When you have to learn something different every year it is hard to play fast because you have to think so much before the snap of the ball, to play this game you need to just react and that takes time.
You read about fans and this organization about consistency with players and coaches. But as soon as things go wrong they are ready for a change. Giants, Packers, and Chargers were patience.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

John Manfreda wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

John Manfreda wrote:

Countertrey wrote:

John Manfreda wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:Correction: if I'm not mistaken, didn't we spend 2 1st round picks on Campbell?

No. In 2005, we traded our 2006 1st, 2005's 3rd, and 2006's 4th to move up to get Campbell.

FYI that 2006 4th turned out to be Brandon Marshall. Ouch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Campbell
now his career stats are gone. Wow that website must have been giving out great information, why did they take it away. I guess it wasn't reliable.

Yet, you see fit to use it...

I never use it, it was the staff that used it. Get your facts straight.

The staf uzed teh trade informashion. You used the Jason Cambpell career stats informashion. Two different pages.

same website and that shows that the website they used isn't reliable so I do not believe them one bit. Use reliable cites.

So there's a double standard? You can remember 4 years ago and just trust you, but not only does your opposition have to have citations, but credible citations?

Fios wrote:

Fios wrote:

markshark84 wrote:Oh, sorry. Still getting a kick out of the VC reference. As if his opinion is one of worth. I'm still waiting for an Isaih reference. I would love one. What does Isaih think of JC. If he is a go, it is FACT that JC is the best QB in the NFL right now.

Who is Isaih?

markshark84 wrote:Seriously though, I think that what you are missing completely is the fact that JC has shown absolutely NO improvement and even CONSIDERING him to be potentially a championship-caliber QB is idiotic and boarders on insanity. He sites fumbles???? What???? I care about points scored, passing yards, passing rating, you know --- the stats that MATTER. The funniest part is the "how do you know" quote. Priceless. I swear VC is a straight up baffoon.

First, if you want to call someone a buffoon you should, you know, spell it correctly. Secondly, this:

http://www.nfl.com/players/jasoncampbel ... =CAM375235

You'll note his passer rating, completion percentage and yards have gone up -- also known as improved -- each year. I know though, it's easier to engage in hyperbole than actual facts. Note, I'm not saying I think the world of JC, in fact I think his ceiling is lower than I did at the start of the season. But you said: "I care about points scored, passing yards, passing rating, you know --- the stats that MATTER." and then failed to note the improvement in 2 of the 3 stats that MATTER.

still waiting for a reply

John Manfreda wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

John Manfreda wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

John Manfreda wrote:

Countertrey wrote:

John Manfreda wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:Correction: if I'm not mistaken, didn't we spend 2 1st round picks on Campbell?

No. In 2005, we traded our 2006 1st, 2005's 3rd, and 2006's 4th to move up to get Campbell.

FYI that 2006 4th turned out to be Brandon Marshall. Ouch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Campbell
now his career stats are gone. Wow that website must have been giving out great information, why did they take it away. I guess it wasn't reliable.

Yet, you see fit to use it...

I never use it, it was the staff that used it. Get your facts straight.

The staf uzed teh trade informashion. You used the Jason Cambpell career stats informashion. Two different pages.

same website and that shows that the website they used isn't reliable so I do not believe them one bit. Use reliable cites.

So there's a double standard? You can remember 4 years ago and just trust you, but not only does your opposition have to have citations, but credible citations?

I never said they had to cite, I am pointing out what a hypocrite they are. GEt a clue for once in your life. I trusted him that we gave up a 1rst, a 3rd and 4th. Seriously get a clue.

Bob 0119 wrote:

Champsturf wrote:

SkinsFreak wrote:

Redskins.com wrote:Jason Campbell is on the verge of setting a new team mark for lowest interception percentage in a season.

Campbell has thrown 476 passes with just six interceptions, a 1.26 percentage. That would best the previous mark of 1.60 set by Mark Brunell in 2006.

NOOOOOO!!! THIS CAN'T BE TRUE! CAMPBELL IS THE "WROST" QB SINCE SHULER!!!

Really? You post this? Who gives a crap about lowest INT % when you're comparing dink and dunkers? Is it me, or is it kind of hard to throw an INT if you don't take a chance and throw the ball actually past the first down marker?

Now I'm not saying he's the worst QB since Shuler, but he really isn't very good...at all. I don't care how much some people say that he's improved, because he still can't score any points. If it weren't for Portis being the stud that he was at the beginning of the season, Campbell would've looked about as good then as he has the latter half of the season. Teams had a reason to to allow Campbell to throw, they had to defend Portis. now, they all seem to know that with Portis hurt and Campbell unwilling to throw over their collective heads, they can (and should) still try to defend the ailing Portis. I find it somewhat amusing that Defenses find an injured Portis more of a threat than a healthy Campbell.

To put things into the proper perspective...

Portis has scored 8 rushing touchdowns.

Sure he's accounted for a sizeable chunk of the Redskins offensive production (team total: 4852 yards) with his 1407 rushing yards, and 218 recieving yards, but he hasn't exactly been our offensive scoring threat either.

Now before anybody goes and starts blaming the coaching for his lack of touchdowns, ask how that's any different from Campbell's excuse for the very same indictment.

Now, if Zorn is actually willing to honor the term "open," then I'll be content with his decision.

John Manfreda wrote:

DaRealistJoka wrote:

SkinsFreak wrote:

Champsturf wrote:

SkinsFreak wrote:

Redskins.com wrote:Jason Campbell is on the verge of setting a new team mark for lowest interception percentage in a season.

Campbell has thrown 476 passes with just six interceptions, a 1.26 percentage. That would best the previous mark of 1.60 set by Mark Brunell in 2006.

:shock: :shock: NOOOOOO!!! THIS CAN'T BE TRUE! CAMPBELL IS THE "WROST" QB SINCE SHULER!!! :explode:

Really? You post this? Who gives a crap about lowest INT % when you're comparing dink and dunkers? Is it me, or is it kind of hard to throw an INT if you don't take a chance and throw the ball actually past the first down marker?

Now I'm not saying he's the worst QB since Shuler, but he really isn't very good...at all. I don't care how much some people say that he's improved, because he still can't score any points. If it weren't for Portis being the stud that he was at the beginning of the season, Campbell would've looked about as good then as he has the latter half of the season. Teams had a reason to to allow Campbell to throw, they had to defend Portis. now, they all seem to know that with Portis hurt and Campbell unwilling to throw over their collective heads, they can (and should) still try to defend the ailing Portis. I find it somewhat amusing that Defenses find an injured Portis more of a threat than a healthy Campbell.

I was simply citing another area of improvement for JC, along with the points of improvement Fios posted... and also making a joke with it. Only one QB, Jeff Garcia, has thrown less Int's this year... one less Int. Now, in no way did I anoint JC to the HoF with that post, just sharing some facts regarding an area of improvement. He is improving, so it's not inconceivable that he will continue to improve. That doesn't mean you don't give Colt a look, as I've said a gazillion times before.

But I still go along and agree with what PulpExposure said several pages ago...

PulpExposure wrote:Zorn has improved his mechanics, but he hasn't done much at the tail end of this year to show that he's a much better QB than he was.

As SkinsFreak posted earlier...you run an open QB competition, and let the best man win. It's not inconceivable that Campbell will get better with the offense, and feel more confident (i.e., take more shots downfield) once he spends more than 1 year starting in the same system.

It's also not inconceivable that Brennan fits the system better than Campbell and wins the job.

I agree with you, I was just arguing with a friend about this, I told him that Campbell might be a Garcia type QB in this league, were he will not put up big numbers, take care of the football , and make crucial plays with his feet. I believe people want a Brees, Manning, and Tom type QB. Every QB is not going to be that caliber.

Has Campbell really had a fair shot? He has had 3 different Coordinators. I don’t see how any QB can be that comfortable to play at a level he needs to play at. Plus looking at his stats he has improved every year. It is funny to come on here, and read the non sense people write. When you have to learn something different every year it is hard to play fast because you have to think so much before the snap of the ball, to play this game you need to just react and that takes time.
You read about fans and this organization about consistency with players and coaches. But as soon as things go wrong they are ready for a change. Giants, Packers, and Chargers were patience.

He is no Jeff Garcia, Jeff has been far more successful, and is way than crappy JC.

Countertrey wrote:

Now, if Zorn is actually willing to honor the term "open," then I'll be content with his decision.

And, if he's not? You going to fire him?