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

I would like to see Campbell bring us back in the 4th quarter, just once.

PulpExposure wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:But if not forever, when? This is his 4th year. After 20 games as the undisputed starter, his career QB rating is a paltry 77.3.

77.3 isn't awful, but it's not great, either. That's a higher QB rating than Eli Manning has ever had for a year, and far above Eli Manning's career rating (73.4). Eli had a rating of 73.9 this year. Should they have benched him? I mean, Eli is not a great QB, but he was the Superbowl MVP, and he's at least played more than 20 games.

20 games is really not enough time imho to evaluate a QB and definitively say he's not good enough. By the end of this year, we'll have enough info to make that call.

If he has another year this year like last year, then I bet the Skins will start the QB carosel again. I don't think you will be any happier when that happens.

FYI 77.3 is about the QB rating of Brett Favre in his first two seasons (78.4 rating, and that's with having played 31 games). Good thing Green Bay didn't give up on him then, eh?

Colt is likely to be starting by week 12 this year, when the brilliant minds running the show decide that 2-9 is too deep a hole for the great Jason Campbell to dig us out of.

Quoted for posterity.

VetSkinsFan wrote:I agree with the sentiment here. Colt is the one that got the most accomplished. Considering he was 3rd string playing vs 3rd string, he was on level playing ground.

Not really. For example, in the Colts game, he threw some passes that ended up being completions, but would have been picked off by better players...the ones you find playing 1st string.

And while he has 31 passing records, the NFL is littered with players from record-setting scheme offenses who couldn't transition to the NFL: David Carr, Andre Ware, David Klingler, Tommy Chang, any QB who went to Texas Tech.

He also set all of those records against really crappy opponents...Hawaii plays no one. They played Georgia in their Bowl game last season, and he got smoked (yes, I know he was probably playing injured). Otherwise, it's cupcake city.

Not saying he won't end up being good, however, there's a reason why he lasted until the 6th round, and it wasn't his knee.

As for preseason performance, I'm sure we both can recall far too many 3rd string QBs who would come in, light up a 3rd string defense in a meaningless preseason game, and then never pan out.

Let me say it again: preseason performance doesn't tell you a lot. Didn't Danny Wuerffle show us that?

<sigh> I'm not saying he's the best ever. I'm just saying that when he's been given a chance, he's succeeded. I'm saying that if JC is gonna get benched, then Colt deserves at least consideration. You can name all the never was's that you want, that still doesn't positively disqaulify Colt. Colt is Colt and Colt needs to be judged on Colt's performances.

PulpExposure wrote:77.3 isn't awful, but it's not great, either. That's a higher QB rating than Eli Manning has ever had for a year, and far above Eli Manning's career rating (73.4). Eli had a rating of 73.9 this year. Should they have benched him? I mean, Eli is not a great QB, but he was the Superbowl MVP, and he's at least played more than 20 games.

As for the QB rating, I threw that out there as one particular measurement to be considered along with others (Like wins and losses, TD's etc.)
And Eli Manning is surely not living up to expectations. But you chose to select the one successful QB with a lower rating, and ignore all of the others that failed. Fine. That changes nothing. If you look at QB rating only, you'll still see a direct correlation between higher numbers and success versus lower numbers and failure in 95% of the cases. And the difference between 77 rating and 86 rating may not sound like much (numbers wise) but when you look closer you see a career rating of 83.6 (Brian Griese) and 85.7 (Bret Favre) says that a little means a lot....and ratings in the 70's don't cut it. Those with the 70's ratings are either career clipboard holders or run out of the league.

PulpExposure wrote:20 games is really not enough time imho to evaluate a QB and definitively say he's not good enough. By the end of this year, we'll have enough info to make that call.

If he has another year this year like last year, then I bet the Skins will start the QB carosel again. I don't think you will be any happier when that happens.

FYI 77.3 is about the QB rating of Brett Favre in his first two seasons (78.4 rating, and that's with having played 31 games). Good thing Green Bay didn't give up on him then, eh?

Are you in any way shape or form comparing Campbell to Favre? Campbell can't shine Favres shoes! And don't play games with numbers PAL. Brett Favre's QB rating in his first year.....NEW SYSTEM, VIRTUAL ROOKIE (first 15 games) with the Packers was 85.3. (That's just a .4 difference in his career 85.7) He had a big drop off in his second year (no doubt due to the fact that the Packers weren't known for being a great team in those days), but his third year it was way up to 90.7, and remained in the high 90's for the next several years.

What do those numbers actually say? It says that it doesn't take 4-5 years of grooming to recognize who is and who is not made of the right stuff. Favre showed it immediately, and by his third year, he was already BRETT FAVRE, future HOF.

But lets not get all caught up just on what Brett Favre has done. Let's look at some others?

Tom Brady, first year 86.5

Ben Roethlisberger first year 98.1

Peyton Manning, second year 90.7

Tony Romo first year 95.1

Jeff Garcia second year 97.6

Kurt Warner first year 109.2

Philip Rivers first year (4 games experience) 92.0

Mark Brunell first year (2 games experience) 82.0

Marc Bulger first year 101.5

Carson Palmer second year (13 games experience) 101.1

Chad Pennington first full year (3 games experience) 104.2

Steve McNair first year (4 games experience) 90.6

So you can go ahead and cherry pick to find what remotely supports your position, but the bottom line is that it doesn't take 3 and 4 years for a player to produce.

Jason Campbell, by every measure so far is a bust. Just another of those talents that (as you say) litter the NFL who never make it at the Pro level.

There is nothing about Campbell's ACTUAL performance that suggests he's on the cusp of breaking out. What his performance does show is that he suffers from the same problems in 2008 as he did in 2006. Not a good sign at all.

There is nothing about Campbell's ACTUAL performance that suggests he's on the cusp of breaking out. What his performance does show is that he suffers from the same problems in 2008 as he did in 2006. Not a good sign at all.

Completely plausible. Cannot argue that his points do not have merit. I don't completely buy into it, but I wouldn't argue against it.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

There is nothing about Campbell's ACTUAL performance that suggests he's on the cusp of breaking out. What his performance does show is that he suffers from the same problems in 2008 as he did in 2006. Not a good sign at all.

Completely plausible. Cannot argue that his points do not have merit. I don't completely buy into it, but I wouldn't argue against it.

Now don't get me wrong.....there are examples where a QB has a major jump in performance in their 3rd season. Drew Brees comes to mind as one example, but these cases are few and far between. Most often improvement occurs in steady steps. And you see a QB develop those subtle skills that transform them from average to exceptional by learning the nuances of the position: looking off DB's; learning their weaknesses and strengths and setting them up; reading defenses better; mastering that non verbal communication with their receivers. These are the things a young QB is expected to learn, and that takes time. But you automatically expect them to be able to hit an open receiver down field. That's what they're supposed to bring to the table day 1. If they struggle with that, you have a big problem.

Unfortunately, there are countless David Carrs out there who's team kept believing that next year would be THE YEAR....he just needed a little of this, and a little of that, and presto. But next year never came for Houston and Carr. Didn't happen for Boller and Baltimore. Grossman and Chicago. And the list goes on and on. Yet, Boller and Grossman at least showed flashes of excellence far more so than Campbell has.

My pessimism regarding Campbell is based on what I've seen. Hey, I hope he proves me wrong, and he lights it up this year. But I wouldn't go betting my life savings on it.

He hasn't been able to correct those fundamental flaws in his game...slow decision making and holding the ball too long; the old receiver stare down; poor touch on his throws, short medium and long (short ones in the turf, medium ones off target, and long ones overthrown.) None of this has much to do with what offensive system being run, and it doesn't allow room for him to focus on the finer, more subtle points of the position that he should be learning at this stage.

Now, Campbell has a new system to learn that requires even more from the QB than most systems, while he continues to struggle with the basics of throw and catch. This is reason for hope and faith?

10 to 1 odds say Campbell's days as a starter are numbered.

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.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:But if not forever, when? This is his 4th year. After 20 games as the undisputed starter, his career QB rating is a paltry 77.3.

77.3 isn't awful, but it's not great, either. That's a higher QB rating than Eli Manning has ever had for a year, and far above Eli Manning's career rating (73.4). Eli had a rating of 73.9 this year. Should they have benched him? I mean, Eli is not a great QB, but he was the Superbowl MVP, and he's at least played more than 20 games.

20 games is really not enough time imho to evaluate a QB and definitively say he's not good enough. By the end of this year, we'll have enough info to make that call.

If he has another year this year like last year, then I bet the Skins will start the QB carosel again. I don't think you will be any happier when that happens.

FYI 77.3 is about the QB rating of Brett Favre in his first two seasons (78.4 rating, and that's with having played 31 games). Good thing Green Bay didn't give up on him then, eh?

Colt is likely to be starting by week 12 this year, when the brilliant minds running the show decide that 2-9 is too deep a hole for the great Jason Campbell to dig us out of.

Quoted for posterity.

VetSkinsFan wrote:I agree with the sentiment here. Colt is the one that got the most accomplished. Considering he was 3rd string playing vs 3rd string, he was on level playing ground.

Not really. For example, in the Colts game, he threw some passes that ended up being completions, but would have been picked off by better players...the ones you find playing 1st string.

And while he has 31 passing records, the NFL is littered with players from record-setting scheme offenses who couldn't transition to the NFL: David Carr, Andre Ware, David Klingler, Tommy Chang, any QB who went to Texas Tech.

He also set all of those records against really crappy opponents...Hawaii plays no one. They played Georgia in their Bowl game last season, and he got smoked (yes, I know he was probably playing injured). Otherwise, it's cupcake city.

Not saying he won't end up being good, however, there's a reason why he lasted until the 6th round, and it wasn't his knee.

As for preseason performance, I'm sure we both can recall far too many 3rd string QBs who would come in, light up a 3rd string defense in a meaningless preseason game, and then never pan out.

Let me say it again: preseason performance doesn't tell you a lot. Didn't Danny Wuerffle show us that?

<sigh> I'm not saying he's the best ever. I'm just saying that when he's been given a chance, he's succeeded. I'm saying that if JC is gonna get benched, then Colt deserves at least consideration. You can name all the never was's that you want, that still doesn't positively disqaulify Colt. Colt is Colt and Colt needs to be judged on Colt's performances.

You also forgot coulda, woulda, shoulda, he said some of those passes would have been picked off he were playing with the first string, well maybe if he was playing with the first string he wouldn't have taken that risk? Ever thought of that.

Colt Brennan is the man.

John, you're making too much sense

VetSkinsFan wrote:

This is what kills me. WHY? Why is Colt unlikely to EVER be a starter? He came into camp, gets reps with inferior talent, and is the only one of the three that seem capable of COMPLETING A PASS BEYOND 10 YARDS. And bull to this business about the opposition being non-starters. He was being supported by non-starters too. And I don't care if it's Ronald McDonald running routs, he threw some fine, fine balls, and made things happen out there. So this is what automatically makes him unworthy of consideration? That makes sense to you?

I agree with the sentiment here. Colt is the one that got the most accomplished. Considering he was 3rd string playing vs 3rd string, he was on level playing ground. Every hurdle he's been given he's cleared. There's nothing to disprove that he has the potential to be successful in the NFL.


non-pro style offense in college - among peers, he stood out with 31, count 'em, 31 records. Pass happy offense wtf ever. 31 records in ANYTHING is a plus on a risk assessment.

played 3rd string in pre-season - successful in the 'group' that he's currently competed against. If you're kid is in the 1st grade and getting As&Bs, do you leave him there or step him up? I don't think you leave him there. he should be given even more credit based on the fact that he missed OTAs with rehab.

Please, someone showed me where he performed SUBPAR to the other QBs and show me why he's not worth the air he breathes as has been insinuated.

I'm not saying he's the next jesus christ in football pads, but, come on, he's earned the right to be respected for what he's done so far.

Does anyone listen to Zorn when he talks about the QB situation?

-Brennan has the worst mechanics Ive ever seen in a QB. Its BAD.
-JC performance in the Carolina game was due to HORRID Oline play. Zorn said so HIMSELF. His first 4 passes 3 had no chance at all because on 3 STEP DROPS he had pressure in his face. REPEAT. 3 STEP DROPS!!!
-Can we let JC be in a system for more than oh, I dont know? 2 years before we say the man cant play? Whats with you people? How can you judge a guy who had to learn an EXTREMELY complex Saunders system which favors VETERAN QB's (see Collins and Green) and then has to abandon that sytem to run ANOTHER new Offense?
-And please dont make it seem like this guy cant play? He was great at Dallas, great against Philly the second game, great agaist Detroit, he was the only one to show up on Offense against Greenbay and was clutch agaist NY leading us to the 2 yard line.

Give JC actual TIME to learn the offense. 20 starts aint crap in the NFL. Thats not even 2 years guys come on.

VetSkinsFan wrote:I also like tha the doesn't get rattled after being sacked or hit(so far). Poise and confidence!!

lol Its funny how POISE was the thing EVERYONE in the media said that JC had. Now he has what FANs, not coaches perceive as a bad game (see oline) and n ow he dont have poise anymore. Breenan comes in a lights up WAC conference players and now he has poise and confidence lol.

If skins fans ran this team we would be 0-16 every year I tell ya.

rdskn4eva wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

This is what kills me. WHY? Why is Colt unlikely to EVER be a starter? He came into camp, gets reps with inferior talent, and is the only one of the three that seem capable of COMPLETING A PASS BEYOND 10 YARDS. And bull to this business about the opposition being non-starters. He was being supported by non-starters too. And I don't care if it's Ronald McDonald running routs, he threw some fine, fine balls, and made things happen out there. So this is what automatically makes him unworthy of consideration? That makes sense to you?

I agree with the sentiment here. Colt is the one that got the most accomplished. Considering he was 3rd string playing vs 3rd string, he was on level playing ground. Every hurdle he's been given he's cleared. There's nothing to disprove that he has the potential to be successful in the NFL.


non-pro style offense in college - among peers, he stood out with 31, count 'em, 31 records. Pass happy offense wtf ever. 31 records in ANYTHING is a plus on a risk assessment.

played 3rd string in pre-season - successful in the 'group' that he's currently competed against. If you're kid is in the 1st grade and getting As&Bs, do you leave him there or step him up? I don't think you leave him there. he should be given even more credit based on the fact that he missed OTAs with rehab.

Please, someone showed me where he performed SUBPAR to the other QBs and show me why he's not worth the air he breathes as has been insinuated.

I'm not saying he's the next jesus christ in football pads, but, come on, he's earned the right to be respected for what he's done so far.

Wow there are some idiot people on this Board. Does anyone listen to Zorn when he talks about the QB situation?

-Brennan has the worst mechanics Ive ever seen in a QB. Its BAD.
-JC performance in the Carolina game was due to HORRID Oline play. Zorn said so HIMSELF. His first 4 passes 3 had no chance at all because on 3 STEP DROPS he had pressure in his face. REPEAT. 3 STEP DROPS!!!
-Can we let JC be in a system for more than oh, I dont know? 2 years before we say the man cant play? Whats with you people? How can you judge a guy who had to learn an EXTREMELY complex Saunders system which favors VETERAN QB's (see Collins and Green) and then has to abandon that sytem to run ANOTHER new Offense?
-And please dont make it seem like this guy cant play? He was great at Dallas, great against Philly the second game, great agaist Detroit, he was the only one to show up on Offense against Greenbay and was clutch agaist NY leading us to the 2 yard line.

Give JC actual TIME to learn the offense. 20 starts aint crap in the NFL. Thats not even 2 years guys come on.

First and foremost, welcome to the boards.
Now, let's begin:

-Brennan has the worst mechanics Ive ever seen in a QB. Its BAD.

Nowhere did I mention Colt was pro bowl caliber. What anyone CAN see, however, is that he's performed when he's asked. Take it with a grain of salt that he's not playing 1st string, but you can only judge him on what he has been given a chance to show, and he's shown it thus far with whatever chance he's gotten. Ask JC, mechanics can (ad I am sure are) getting worked on. It's called L E A R N I N G.

-Can we let JC be in a system for more than oh, I dont know? 2 years before we say the man cant play? Whats with you people? How can you judge a guy who had to learn an EXTREMELY complex Saunders system which favors VETERAN QB's (see Collins and Green) and then has to abandon that sytem to run ANOTHER new Offense?

You're new here, so you don't have the benefit of seeing the dynamic opinions of JC. Few here are adamantly against him(myself included), but there are steps of progression that he should be going thru. He isn't. He's reading JUST as slow today as he was when JG pulled Brunell. That's the types of things that I'm concerned with and have put doubt in my mind. I've not written JC off, but there has to come a point in a situation where you have to man up and say, "Maybe this isn't gonna work." If there's not the natural progression this year,then I believe that it's open competition. If JC's that far in his learnings, he'll have no problem winning his job.

-And please dont make it seem like this guy cant play? He was great at Dallas, great against Philly the second game, great agaist Detroit, he was the only one to show up on Offense against Greenbay and was clutch agaist NY leading us to the 2 yard line.

The word missing here is consistancy. It's not there. Until there is conistancy, there will not be success, including JC.

rdskn4eva wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:I also like tha the doesn't get rattled after being sacked or hit(so far). Poise and confidence!!

lol Its funny how POISE was the thing EVERYONE in the media said that JC had. Now he has what FANs, not coaches perceive as a bad game (see oline) and n ow he dont have poise anymore. Breenan comes in a lights up WAC conference players and now he has poise and confidence lol.

If skins fans ran this team we would be 0-16 every year I tell ya.

Where was it mentioned that JC doesn't have poise? Let's red what is actually present in comments. You're assuming, and you know what they say abouit assuming? Well, it ain't me.

And to note, I never watched Brennan in college, yet another assumption. I was basing my modest opinion on the pre-season games I've seen.

I can´t believe what some of the normally sane people on this board are writting.

You guys wanna see a rookie if JC can´t get it done during the season?????

What surprises me the most is that some posters are ready to anoint Colt Brennan the starting job based purely on his preseason performance. This is ludicrous.

Give JC this season to show what he´s got.

If by next year we are having the same conversation, then I´ll be the first one to call for a QB change.

The FO might think something different though. If JC fails this year, I´m almost sure Zorn would look for an experienced QB to run his system instead of giving the reins to a rookie QB.

Remember that Zorn is also on a timetable to show good results. A veteran QB that actually knows the WCO could surely give him some strategic edge to win some games next year.

El Mexican wrote:I can´t believe what some of the normally sane people on this board are writting.

You guys wanna see a rookie if JC can´t get it done during the season?????

What surprises me the most is that some posters are ready to anoint Colt Brennan the starting job based purely on his preseason performance. This is ludicrous.

Give JC this season to show what he´s got.

If by next year we are having the same conversation, then I´ll be the first one to call for a QB change.

The FO might think something different though. If JC fails this year, I´m almost sure Zorn would look for an experienced QB to run his system instead of giving the reins to a rookie QB.

Remember that Zorn is also on a timetable to show good results. A veteran QB that actually knows the WCO could surely give him some strategic edge to win some games next year.

You referring to me?

VetSkinsFan wrote:

El Mexican wrote:I can´t believe what some of the normally sane people on this board are writting.

You guys wanna see a rookie if JC can´t get it done during the season?????

What surprises me the most is that some posters are ready to anoint Colt Brennan the starting job based purely on his preseason performance. This is ludicrous.

Give JC this season to show what he´s got.

If by next year we are having the same conversation, then I´ll be the first one to call for a QB change.

The FO might think something different though. If JC fails this year, I´m almost sure Zorn would look for an experienced QB to run his system instead of giving the reins to a rookie QB.

Remember that Zorn is also on a timetable to show good results. A veteran QB that actually knows the WCO could surely give him some strategic edge to win some games next year.

You referring to me?

In a word: yes.

Some other posters have your opinion, but are not as vocal.

Isn´t it too early to throw JC in the bin? I completely agree that he needs to show up big time for this season, because, up to now, he has not lived up to his first round status. If the same results persist at the end of the season I´ll change to your side of the fence.

Right now, I´m trusting Gibbs and Co. on the confidence they showed in picking Campbell.

El Mexican wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

El Mexican wrote:I can´t believe what some of the normally sane people on this board are writting.

You guys wanna see a rookie if JC can´t get it done during the season?????

What surprises me the most is that some posters are ready to anoint Colt Brennan the starting job based purely on his preseason performance. This is ludicrous.

Give JC this season to show what he´s got.

If by next year we are having the same conversation, then I´ll be the first one to call for a QB change.

The FO might think something different though. If JC fails this year, I´m almost sure Zorn would look for an experienced QB to run his system instead of giving the reins to a rookie QB.

Remember that Zorn is also on a timetable to show good results. A veteran QB that actually knows the WCO could surely give him some strategic edge to win some games next year.

You referring to me?

In a word: yes.

Some other posters have your opinion, but are not as vocal.

Isn´t it too early to throw JC in the bin? I completely agree that he needs to show up big time for this season, because, up to now, he has not lived up to his first round status. If the same results persist at the end of the season I´ll change to your side of the fence.

Right now, I´m trusting Gibbs and Co. on the confidence they showed in picking Campbell.

Please, illustrate where I've said JC is thru. I've said that thus far, he's not improving to the point that I, the arm chair GM in question, would be content with. I have continually tried to convey that I haven't lost total faith in JC, but every game that he doesn't step up with consistancy and tangible output. Until he DOES put out, I'll continue to have the same stance that I do have. If anyone chooses to show me conflicting evidence otherwise, I'll be here all week.

John Manfreda wrote:You also forgot coulda, woulda, shoulda, he said some of those passes would have been picked off he were playing with the first string, well maybe if he was playing with the first string he wouldn't have taken that risk? Ever thought of that.

Jim Zorn disagrees with you. But what does he know about playing QB in the NFL?

"We had a couple of fortunate catches, or I should say risky throws and very fortunate catches when you watch video again," Zorn said. "Colt Brennan had a couple of plays where they could have gone either way. … Those are things he can learn from.

"He has to become a more disciplined quarterback, not risk as much as he risks in the game. This week, it turned out great for us, a great performance. But it could easily have been the other way."

"He was very accurate in his throws," Zorn said. "I thought his decision-making was average. Even on the big play he threw to Jason Goode, that was not a great decision. But the decision he made on the corner route for a touchdown? The scramble play for a touchdown to Mason? Awesome. So it's just a mixed bag."

That's what you get with Brennan right now, and what you got from him in college (but in college, he could get away with making risky throws against the Nevadas of the world and in preseason against 3rd/4th stringers you can as well...whereas he won't be able to against first string players). Don't get me wrong, I like our project felon QB, but he's always been a risk-taker in college, and he'll be a risk-taker in the pros. He needs to sit and learn from Zorn how to play QB in the NFL. Throwing him out too early could absolutely ruin this kid, like it did to Patrick Ramsey.

RayNAustin wrote:Brett Favre's QB rating in his first year.....NEW SYSTEM, VIRTUAL ROOKIE (first 15 games) with the Packers was 85.3. (That's just a .4 difference in his career 85.7) He had a big drop off in his second year (no doubt due to the fact that the Packers weren't known for being a great team in those days), but his third year it was way up to 90.7, and remained in the high 90's for the next several years.

What do those numbers actually say? It says that it doesn't take 4-5 years of grooming to recognize who is and who is not made of the right stuff. Favre showed it immediately, and by his third year, he was already BRETT FAVRE, future HOF.

I have to disagree with you about this point. Favre rode the pines for Atlanta for a season, before he was traded to GB. He played in two games throwing 4 passes, two of which were intercepted (his first pass was intercepted and returned for a TD by the Redskins), and the other two were incomplete. The fact that the Falcons traded him shows their impatience for letting a player develop. Yes Jason is not as quick picking up the skills a QB needs as Favre, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he can never learn them. And what really is our alternative? Unless we bring in a vet, The next starting QB for the Skins will need another two to three years before he is ready to go. I think the game has slowed down considerably for Campbell, although he still has a ways to go. What I don't see in Jason is that magic spark that some guys seem to have; that penchant for bringing a team back late in the fourth quarter. That's when, in the past, JC has made a costly mistake; when the pressure was the greatest. I need to see that from him soon. What he needs is confidence in his ability to do it, and that comes with winning a few in the final minutes of games.

taking things a little out of context here but for the most part I agree with a lot of these points

JSPB22 wrote:..... Jason is not as quick picking up the skills a QB needs as Favre, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he can never learn them. And what really is our alternative? Unless we bring in a vet, The next starting QB for the Skins will need another two to three years before he is ready to go.

IF Campbell does not become the QB that Zorn needs, I believe we will have to evalute getting someone else or just biding our time with Campbell until the next QB is ready - this is really all on Campbell now to show that he is going to be our future QB

IMO, he's not progressing - a little, but not as much as he should.

JSPB22 wrote:..... I think the game has slowed down considerably for Campbell, although he still has a ways to go. What I don't see in Jason is that magic spark that some guys seem to have; that penchant for bringing a team back late in the fourth quarter. That's when, in the past, JC has made a costly mistake; when the pressure was the greatest. I need to see that from him soon. What he needs is confidence in his ability to do it, and that comes with winning a few in the final minutes of games.

I hope that we will see the QB that Gibbs thought he could be and that his "slowness" will improve dramatically.

He would appear to have the weapons he needs in both the new guys and 2 very good RBs - given a healthy O line he will hopefully show us this year that he will be the next great Redskins QB
I do believe last week's performance by the line was a complete aberration

JSPB22 wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:Brett Favre's QB rating in his first year.....NEW SYSTEM, VIRTUAL ROOKIE (first 15 games) with the Packers was 85.3. (That's just a .4 difference in his career 85.7) He had a big drop off in his second year (no doubt due to the fact that the Packers weren't known for being a great team in those days), but his third year it was way up to 90.7, and remained in the high 90's for the next several years.

What do those numbers actually say? It says that it doesn't take 4-5 years of grooming to recognize who is and who is not made of the right stuff. Favre showed it immediately, and by his third year, he was already BRETT FAVRE, future HOF.

I have to disagree with you about this point. Favre rode the pines for Atlanta for a season, before he was traded to GB. He played in two games throwing 4 passes, two of which were intercepted (his first pass was intercepted and returned for a TD by the Redskins), and the other two were incomplete. The fact that the Falcons traded him shows their impatience for letting a player develop. Yes Jason is not as quick picking up the skills a QB needs as Favre, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he can never learn them. And what really is our alternative? Unless we bring in a vet, The next starting QB for the Skins will need another two to three years before he is ready to go. I think the game has slowed down considerably for Campbell, although he still has a ways to go. What I don't see in Jason is that magic spark that some guys seem to have; that penchant for bringing a team back late in the fourth quarter. That's when, in the past, JC has made a costly mistake; when the pressure was the greatest. I need to see that from him soon. What he needs is confidence in his ability to do it, and that comes with winning a few in the final minutes of games.

Are you for real? Are you comparing Favres 2 games with the Falcons with what has transpired with Campbell? Totally Absurd.

Campbell rode the pine for a year and a half. Then he started 7 games in the 2006 season. Then he was declared the starter, and got all of the work in OTA's, training camp and pre-season. He started 13 games in 2007 and failed to throw a TD pass to a wide receiver in the first 8-9 games of the year (pathetic). Leading up to the Chicago game, (Game 13), we had a 4 game losing streak that all but KILLED our entire season, and he played almost an entire first half unable to put anything together offensively (well on our way to a 5th straight loss, and another season lost). He gets injured, Collins comes in and has to TD scores in less than 4 minutes. Collins proceeds to win that game, and the next three.....averaging almost 30 points per game. And this is a guy who is a career backup who hadn't started an NFL game in 10 years. That little episode last year proved the ineptness of Campbell and of Gibbs player evaluation skills, if nothing else.

After that, everyone was saying that Collins was only successful because he was so familiar with the system. I don't buy that, but if you do, fine. That simply means that Collins should have been playing all along if he was the most proficient QB, and gave us the best chance to win. After all, that's the canned mantra all head coaches constantly chant...."we put the players on the field that give us the best chance to win" No?

This may come as a surprise to you, but even Gibbs 1 wasn't exactly king of player evaluation. Did you know that Joe Gibbs didn't want Theisman? He wanted to get rid of him as soon as he arrived in 1991. Beathard refused. Gibbs didn't want Riggins. He didn't want to draft Darrel Green either. Those players were Redskins because Beathard controlled personnel in the those days. That is the case with a dozen or more Redskin greats that would never have been Redskins if left up to Gibbs. Can you imagine what impact that might have had on Redskins history? Try two Super Bowl trophies disappearing from their showcase at Redskin Park!

Gibbs II, without Beathard there to remove all of the dangerous sharp objects from the draft room presided over as many poor personnel decisions as he did good ones. He was 50/50 at best, and failed to put on the field a proficient offense in 4 years.

God forbid the unthinkable is true. Could it be that Gibbs drafted the wrong guy as the Redskin's franchise quality QB? Gasp!! No. It's the other 10 guys causing Jesus err I mean Jason's poor results. It's the system....err both systems.....it's the short slow receivers.....it's the bad o-line.....it's the wind....yeah, yeah, that's the ticket, it's the wind, and the sun was in his eyes....err, I mean the moon was in his eyes.

PS: pisssst....don't tell that long list of QB's (the majority of top QB's) that it take 2-3 years to teach them to play.

Don't let big Ben hear that. Don't tell Romo...or Palmer, or Rivers, or any of the many others who achieved almost immediate success in their early NFL days.

Not to split hairs, but Romo sat on the bench for four years before playing.

JansenFan wrote:Not to split hairs, but Romo sat on the bench for four years before playing.

Please split hairs. This QB rating argument is nonsense.
Yes, there are some great names on this list.
There are also some that nobody would think of.

John Elway is # 43, behind Jeff George at #39
Brett Favre is #15, behind Jeff Garcia, Matt Hasselbeck, and Donovan McNabb.
Joe Theismann has a career rating of 77, and a SB ring.

A few of those names at the very bottom of this list are Hall Of Famers.

Give JC a chance before writing him off based upon this meaningless number.

The top career QB ratings:

1 Steve Young* 96.81
2 Peyton Manning 94.37
3 Kurt Warner 93.77
4 Joe Montana* 92.26
5 Marc Bulger 91.26
6 Daunte Culpepper 90.75
7 Chad Pennington 89.32
8 Tom Brady 88.36
9 Drew Brees 87.54
10 Trent Green 87.48
11 Jeff Garcia 86.43
12 Dan Marino* 86.38
13 Donovan McNabb 85.19
14 Matt Hasselbeck 85.10
15 Brett Favre 85.05
16 Rich Gannon 84.71
17 Brian Griese 84.54
18 Jim Kelly* 84.39
19 Mark Brunell 84.21
20 Jake Delhomme 84.05
21 Roger Staubach* 83.42
22 Steve McNair 83.18
23 Brad Johnson 83.08
24 Neil Lomax 82.68
25 Sonny Jurgensen* 82.62
26 Len Dawson* 82.56
27 Ken Anderson 81.86
28 Bernie Kosar 81.83
29 Neil O'Donnell 81.82
30 Danny White 81.71
31 Troy Aikman* 81.62
32 Dave Krieg 81.50
33 Randall Cunningham 81.47
34 Boomer Esiason 81.06
35 Warren Moon* 80.90
36 Jeff Hostetler 80.48
37 Bart Starr* 80.47
38 Ken O'Brien 80.44
39 Jeff George 80.42
40 Fran Tarkenton* 80.35
41 Steve Beuerlein 80.32
42 Dan Fouts* 80.23
43 John Elway* 79.86
44 Tony Eason 79.72
45 Elvis Grbac 79.65
46 Chris Chandler 79.12
47 Mark Rypien 78.93
48 Jim Everett 78.59
49 Aaron Brooks 78.53
50 Phil Simms 78.48
51 Bert Jones 78.21
52 Johnny Unitas* 78.20
53T Jim McMahon 78.17
53T Otto Graham* 78.17
55 Jeff Blake 78.03
56 Bobby Hebert 78.00
57 Frank Ryan 77.61
58 Jim Harbaugh 77.60
59 Joe Theismann 77.37
60 Bob Griese* 77.14
61 Jay Fiedler 77.13
62 Drew Bledsoe 77.06
63 Bill Kenney 76.98
64 Erik Kramer 76.64
65 Gary Danielson 76.58
66 Doug Flutie 76.34
67 Jon Kitna 76.08
68 Stan Humphries 75.83
69 Michael Vick 75.75
70 Wade Wilson 75.57
71 David Carr 75.50
72 Steve Bartkowski 75.44
73T Ken Stabler 75.31
73T Gus Frerotte 75.31
75 Scott Mitchell 75.28
76 Steve Bono 75.27
77 Vinny Testaverde 75.24
78 Tim Couch 75.14
79 Norm Van Brocklin* 75.07
80 Sid Luckman* 75.01
81 Chris Miller 74.93
82 Don Meredith 74.84
83 Brian Sipe 74.79
84 Jake Plummer 74.61
85 Roman Gabriel 74.29
86 Steve DeBerg 74.24
87 Earl Morrall 74.09
88 Y.A. Tittle* 73.65
89 Craig Morton 73.52
90 Rodney Peete 73.30
91 Kerry Collins 73.19
92 Don Majkowski 72.95
93T Daryle Lamonica 72.94
93T Greg Landry 72.94
95 Ron Jaworski 72.78
96 Tommy Kramer 72.77
97 Tony Banks 72.36
98 Bubby Brister 72.28
99 John Brodie 72.27
100 Milt Plum 72.22
101 Sammy Baugh* 72.21
102 Billy Wade 72.19
103 Jay Schroeder 71.68
104 Billy Kilmer 71.56
105 Bill Munson 71.49
106 Trent Dilfer 71.30
107 Lynn Dickey 70.94
108 Terry Bradshaw* 70.92
109 Kordell Stewart 70.69
110 Bill Nelsen 70.25
111 Vince Ferragamo 70.08
112 Steve Grogan 69.61
113 Doug Williams 69.39
114 Charley Johnson 69.21
115 Mike Tomczak 68.91
116 Eric Hipple 68.68
117 Joe Ferguson 68.45
118 Charlie Conerly 68.25
119 Joey Harrington 68.14
120 Dave Brown 67.89
121 Billy Joe Tolliver 67.74
122 Marc Wilson 67.70
123 Tom Flores 67.58
124 Richard Todd 67.57
125 Jim Plunkett 67.45
126 John Hadl 67.41
127 Jim Zorn 67.28
128 Archie Manning 67.10
129 Jim Hart 66.56
130 Norm Snead 65.54
131 Joe Namath* 65.46
132 Rick Mirer 63.53
133 Bobby Layne* 63.38
134 Jack Trudeau 63.32
135 Mike Livingston 63.27
136 Mike Pagel 63.26
137 Ed Brown 62.77
138 Mark Malone 61.89
139 Bob Waterfield* 61.58
140 Eddie LeBaron 61.43
141 George Blanda* 60.65
142 Babe Parilli 59.59
143 Dan Pastorini 59.06
144 Jack Kemp 57.35
145 Tobin Rote 56.79
146 Cotton Davidson 54.88
147 Mike Phipps 52.63
148 Frank Tripucka 52.18

http://www.profootballhof.com/hof/story ... ry_id=2356

RayNAustin wrote:

JSPB22 wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:Brett Favre's QB rating in his first year.....NEW SYSTEM, VIRTUAL ROOKIE (first 15 games) with the Packers was 85.3. (That's just a .4 difference in his career 85.7) He had a big drop off in his second year (no doubt due to the fact that the Packers weren't known for being a great team in those days), but his third year it was way up to 90.7, and remained in the high 90's for the next several years.

What do those numbers actually say? It says that it doesn't take 4-5 years of grooming to recognize who is and who is not made of the right stuff. Favre showed it immediately, and by his third year, he was already BRETT FAVRE, future HOF.

I have to disagree with you about this point. Favre rode the pines for Atlanta for a season, before he was traded to GB. He played in two games throwing 4 passes, two of which were intercepted (his first pass was intercepted and returned for a TD by the Redskins), and the other two were incomplete. The fact that the Falcons traded him shows their impatience for letting a player develop. Yes Jason is not as quick picking up the skills a QB needs as Favre, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he can never learn them. And what really is our alternative? Unless we bring in a vet, The next starting QB for the Skins will need another two to three years before he is ready to go. I think the game has slowed down considerably for Campbell, although he still has a ways to go. What I don't see in Jason is that magic spark that some guys seem to have; that penchant for bringing a team back late in the fourth quarter. That's when, in the past, JC has made a costly mistake; when the pressure was the greatest. I need to see that from him soon. What he needs is confidence in his ability to do it, and that comes with winning a few in the final minutes of games.

Are you for real? Are you comparing Favres 2 games with the Falcons with what has transpired with Campbell? Totally Absurd.

No, and if you had bothered to read what I wrote, you would see that. My point was that the Falcons quit on BF too early. I think we did the same thing with Trent Green.

RayNAustin wrote:Campbell rode the pine for a year and a half. Then he started 7 games in the 2006 season. Then he was declared the starter, and got all of the work in OTA's, training camp and pre-season. He started 13 games in 2007 and failed to throw a TD pass to a wide receiver in the first 8-9 games of the year (pathetic).

That the top 2 WR were injured much of that time means nothing, I suppose?

RayNAustin wrote:Leading up to the Chicago game, (Game 13), we had a 4 game losing streak that all but KILLED our entire season, and he played almost an entire first half unable to put anything together offensively (well on our way to a 5th straight loss, and another season lost).

ST was injured in Philly, and the D lost the first two games for us. In fact, we were way ahead late against Philly, but they came back because ST was out. Gibbs' two TO blunder and ST's murder also occurred during that 4 game stretch.

RayNAustin wrote:After that, everyone was saying that Collins was only successful because he was so familiar with the system. I don't buy that, but if you do, fine. That simply means that Collins should have been playing all along if he was the most proficient QB, and gave us the best chance to win. After all, that's the canned mantra all head coaches constantly chant...."we put the players on the field that give us the best chance to win" No?

You might have a point here if Collins had shown such brilliance in the pre-season, either of the past two seasons. But are you actually denying that Collins showing was because he knew the system so well, and that his life as a career backup was because of some conspiracy to keep him off the field in KC and here?

RayNAustin wrote:This may come as a surprise to you, but even Gibbs 1 wasn't exactly king of player evaluation. Did you know that Joe Gibbs didn't want Theisman? He wanted to get rid of him as soon as he arrived in 1991. Beathard refused. Gibbs didn't want Riggins. He didn't want to draft Darrel Green either. Those players were Redskins because Beathard controlled personnel in the those days. That is the case with a dozen or more Redskin greats that would never have been Redskins if left up to Gibbs.

Where did I ever say Joe was a good GM?

RayNAustin wrote:Can you imagine what impact that might have had on Redskins history? Try two Super Bowl trophies disappearing from their showcase at Redskin Park!

You can't know that.

RayNAustin wrote:God forbid the unthinkable is true. Could it be that Gibbs drafted the wrong guy as the Redskin's franchise quality QB?

And let's assume, for the sake of argument, he did. What now? Start Colt? He would get eaten alive, and probably end up shell-shocked like Ramsey was. Start Collins, who looked as bad in this system as anyone in preseason, including Devine? Get real! We're stuck with Jason for the next couple of seasons anyway, unless we bring in a vet, so you may as well get behind him and hope he can develop into a great QB.

RayNAustin wrote:PS: pisssst....don't tell that long list of QB's (the majority of top QB's) that it take 2-3 years to teach them to play.

Don't let big Ben hear that. Don't tell Romo...or Palmer, or Rivers, or any of the many others who achieved almost immediate success in their early NFL days.

If Campbell had gone into Pittsburgh into the situation BR did, he would have had the same results. And Romo sat for 3 and a half years (Palmer one and a half, and Rivers 2) before playing, so thanks for proving my point.

RayNAustin wrote:
Campbell rode the pine for a year and a half. Then he started 7 games in the 2006 season. Then he was declared the starter, and got all of the work in OTA's, training camp and pre-season. He started 13 games in 2007 and failed to throw a TD pass to a wide receiver in the first 8-9 games of the year (pathetic).

That the top 2 WR were injured much of that time means nothing, I suppose?

I just want to point out that I don't care haw m any receivers are injured, this is still bad. 1/2 the season, a WR didn't catch a TD pass. It is significant in illustrating what a horrible season the offense had last year.