It's time I give in

[Redskin in Canada]

I do not think Campbell is very good at all but ...

How does the saying go about the rock and the hard place?

No question. JC improved. BUT he did not improve mentally or mechanically anywhere near enough to become a franchise QB. He still may have a future as a backup. I wish him well.

In substance, I do not feel that there is disagreement among most of us.

[SkinsJock]

I'm just as disapointed as anyone but the real problem here is not so simple as this player or that coach, being the 'issue' - we need the people in charge to do their jobs better & ensure that the players & coaches that they select can have the opportunity to do what they do as players & coaches - the NFL players & coaches of today are for the most part very talented & just need to be brought together by people that can see what the potential is to make a team out of a group of players & coaches

we just need to have a culture change here and I'm not sure but I'm hopeful that can happen especially at the top of the franchise

[old-timer]

Is it obvious that JC is better now than he was in 2006? I don't think so and I don't think that there is enough to make a valid arguement to support his improvement.

I think it's clear in watching him play, and that the stats bear it out.

What stats? Where? His QB rating which was a result of the WCO? I gave you a ton of stats showing aspects of his game where he has not improved; where are yours? Do I have to take your word for it? You provide ZERO support.

And I am not "bashing" every aspect of his career. I am merely proving that he has not improved. When I hear something that I don't believe is accurate -- I will call it out. He was a draft bust. He has not improved as a QB and definetely has not improved for a typical 5 year veteran. Is that a bad thing to say? Personally, I don't think I am saying anything that isn't OBVIOUS.

I guess none then --- because they DO NOT EXIST.

Are you arguing against yourself?
JC stats have improved every year, but that doesn't make him a good QB. I don't think it is a system thing either. He just doesn't have what it takes to be a good QB in the NFL. He just doesn't have that winning quality. The experiment failed, and the time to cut our losses has come. Actually it came a while back, but we are where we are.

Not to mention my main indicator for saying he has improved is that I've witnessed his improvement on the field. I've watched it. He doesn't make the same dumb throws he made in his first few starts. Some of those first interceptions were truly cringe-worthy. He's quicker in getting the team to the line of scrimmage and running a smoother offense. He makes better decisions and hits his target more often. (Even with receivers that have no hands, his completion percentage has gone up consistently.) He's shown better awareness about when to pull it in and run for some yardage, rather than continuing to flounder before taking a sack.

markshark goes to Campbell's stat page to find data that will confirm his already-held view. He downplays any evidence he might find to the contrary. Then, with a newly-reinforced opinion in hand, he comes here and pretends that positive developments in Campbell's stat lines don't exist. It's an interesting way of developing an argument, but I find it to be unconvincing. (Mostly because it ignores the positive developments in Campbell's stat lines.)

Nevertheless, I'd appeal to anyone (including markshark) who wants to step back a moment, and think about things a little more objectively, to visit his stats page. The numbers do bear it out, even though they also don't tell the whole story.

If one more person says that Campbell is getting better because his completion percentage has gone up, I'm going to throw up.

Anyone who knows anything about the current state of the Redskins knows that Campbell's percentage has gone up because he constantly makes the safe throws and gets 4 yards on 3rd and 8, tucks it in and runs for little yardage after taking a cursory glance, or just takes a killer sack instead of throwing it away. Then he trots off the field, making way for the punting team, and we're all supposed to think 'gee what a great improvement that he didn't throw an incomplete pass past the first down marker'. Saying he's gotten better because of improved completion percentage is almost as delusional as Gibbs saying Brunell got better when Brunell completed 20-some dump-offs in a row to set an NFL record for consecutive completions. Give me a break, please. Being a good QB is more than stats, it's actually WINNING games nobody thought you could, making the great throws when you're surrounded by a poor line - you know, SCORING GAME-WINNING TOUCHDOWNS - stuff really good QB's do. And all that stuff is scarcer than hen's teeth when it comes to Campbell.

[Irn-Bru]

If one more person says that Campbell is getting better because his completion percentage has gone up, I'm going to throw up.

If it spares you the upset stomach, make sure to note that this isn't a discussion about whether Campbell is good, should keep starting, etc. It's simply asking the question of whether he has shown improvement.

Anyone who knows anything about the current state of the Redskins knows that Campbell's percentage has gone up because he constantly makes the safe throws and gets 4 yards on 3rd and 8, tucks it in and runs for little yardage after taking a cursory glance, or just takes a killer sack instead of throwing it away.

Those aren't the only reasons. He's been making better decisions and better throws. And actually one of the knocks early in his career was how little he'd make a daring throw to a receiver — as I can best recall he's taken more risks as time has passed.

Being a good QB is

You're in the wrong thread. No one here is talking about Campbell as a good QB.

[welch]

Campbell looks to me that he has improved over the seasons, and having seen it, I'm convinced.

Wins? Losses? This team has not had good receivers, and recently the offensive line has weakened.

Campbell looks about as good as most of the '80s QBs: Jay Schroeder, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien. Give him the all-around teams they had, and I believe he would play as well.

Compare this year's team to what Jay Schroeder took over that night against the Giants. Schroeder's first pass was a bomb to Art Monk. Do the Redskins have anyone who is half the player that Monk was? Jay S. played behind the Hogs, and could hand off to John Riggins. The following year, the team went 12 - 4, and Schroeder had Monk, Clark, Sanders, and Didier, with Warren at TE and George Rogers running, all behind the prime Hogs.

Stats?

In general, football stats are misleading, and of all the stats, the QB rating has the least foundation. That is, it is a compound of several stats with each component given a certain weight by the rating's creators. I'd call it a pseudo-quantitative stat. Maybe there is no good stat for QBs, and maybe this measurement is better than the old one (yards gained per pass attempt). It's still not dependable.

Campbell has played through all the mess of this season. He deserves appaluse.

[RedskinsFreak]

The reason he's not spotting open receivers is that he seems to be more interested in seeing how the blocking is holding up.

He's been put in such a bad working environment that he can't give his specific duties the attention they deserve.

[RayNAustin]

Is it obvious that JC is better now than he was in 2006? I don't think so and I don't think that there is enough to make a valid arguement to support his improvement.

I think it's clear in watching him play, and that the stats bear it out.

What stats? Where? His QB rating which was a result of the WCO? I gave you a ton of stats showing aspects of his game where he has not improved; where are yours? Do I have to take your word for it? You provide ZERO support.

And I am not "bashing" every aspect of his career. I am merely proving that he has not improved. When I hear something that I don't believe is accurate -- I will call it out. He was a draft bust. He has not improved as a QB and definetely has not improved for a typical 5 year veteran. Is that a bad thing to say? Personally, I don't think I am saying anything that isn't OBVIOUS.

I guess none then --- because they DO NOT EXIST.

Are you arguing against yourself?
JC stats have improved every year, but that doesn't make him a good QB. I don't think it is a system thing either. He just doesn't have what it takes to be a good QB in the NFL. He just doesn't have that winning quality. The experiment failed, and the time to cut our losses has come. Actually it came a while back, but we are where we are.

Not to mention my main indicator for saying he has improved is that I've witnessed his improvement on the field. I've watched it. He doesn't make the same dumb throws he made in his first few starts. Some of those first interceptions were truly cringe-worthy. He's quicker in getting the team to the line of scrimmage and running a smoother offense. He makes better decisions and hits his target more often. (Even with receivers that have no hands, his completion percentage has gone up consistently.) He's shown better awareness about when to pull it in and run for some yardage, rather than continuing to flounder before taking a sack.

markshark goes to Campbell's stat page to find data that will confirm his already-held view. He downplays any evidence he might find to the contrary. Then, with a newly-reinforced opinion in hand, he comes here and pretends that positive developments in Campbell's stat lines don't exist. It's an interesting way of developing an argument, but I find it to be unconvincing. (Mostly because it ignores the positive developments in Campbell's stat lines.)

Nevertheless, I'd appeal to anyone (including markshark) who wants to step back a moment, and think about things a little more objectively, to visit his stats page. The numbers do bear it out, even though they also don't tell the whole story.

All I know is that he started 7 games in 2006 ... result 2-5. Now, in 2009, after 7 games, he's 2-5. This year, he has a much better defense than in 2006. That's not improvement.

Furthermore, nobody ...... NOBODY except Campbell fans talk about how a 4th year starter has improved in these elementary issues like "getting the team to the line of scrimmage" , though I cannot imagine why you would say he now runs a smoother offense. There is NOTHING smooth about Jason Campbell's running of this pathetic offense. Smooth is the LAST adjective that could describe this offense. Disjointed ... uncoordinated ... totally lost ... completely inept ... or just plain terrible would better describe this embarrassment pretending to be an NFL offense.

I've never seen a Redskin offense play so poorly ... and it all starts with the Quarterback. Jason Campbell isn't the only problem on offense ... but he's in the smack dab center of it, and nothing is going to change for the better while the blind continues to lead the blind.

[Irn-Bru]

All I know is that he started 7 games in 2006 ... result 2-5. Now, in 2009, after 7 games, he's 2-5. This year, he has a much better defense than in 2006. That's not improvement.

Considering this is "all you know," I suppose it's not surprising that your analysis is so superficial . . . and wrong.

Furthermore, nobody ...... NOBODY except Campbell fans talk about how a 4th year starter has improved in these elementary issues like "getting the team to the line of scrimmage" , though I cannot imagine why you would say he now runs a smoother offense. There is NOTHING smooth about Jason Campbell's running of this pathetic offense. Smooth is the LAST adjective that could describe this offense. Disjointed ... uncoordinated ... totally lost ... completely inept ... or just plain terrible would better describe this embarrassment pretending to be an NFL offense.

Dude . . . no one is calling this offense good. And I disagree that being a game manager isn't an important part of being a QB. It is an important part of the game, and many QBs don't do very well with it, including Campbell several years ago. Remember how many penalties we'd get for delay of game? And we'd get to the line of scrimmage without any time to adjust. Etc. I think you're way off here.

I've never seen a Redskin offense play so poorly ... and it all starts with the Quarterback. Jason Campbell isn't the only problem on offense ... but he's in the smack dab center of it, and nothing is going to change for the better while the blind continues to lead the blind.

Some people just can't take two seconds to read the thread fully before responding. NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT CAMPBELL BEING A GOOD QB. Maybe if I write in caps people will heed before responding.

[old-timer]

Campbell looks to me that he has improved over the seasons, and having seen it, I'm convinced.

Wins? Losses? This team has not had good receivers, and recently the offensive line has weakened.

No doubt Campbell has been dealt a bad hand. But I don't see what improvements you're talking about - any QB should be able to improve his completion percentage if he tries nothing but dumpoffs and screens. Worse, every sack has to be considered a strong potential fumble with him. He still misses wide open WR's that should go for TD's, Really, considering what was given up for him, I think he's got to be considered a bust.

Campbell looks about as good as most of the '80s QBs: Jay Schroeder, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien. Give him the all-around teams they had, and I believe he would play as well.

Whooooaaa there. Williams and Rypien both had very accurate deep balls, and they were both as good as Campbell in every other phase of the game. Schroeder was not nearly as good as either one of them. Campbell is better than Schroeder, and worse than the other two, quite substantially really when you consider Campbell's lack of deep ball accuracy.

Compare this year's team to what Jay Schroeder took over that night against the Giants. Schroeder's first pass was a bomb to Art Monk. Do the Redskins have anyone who is half the player that Monk was? Jay S. played behind the Hogs, and could hand off to John Riggins. The following year, the team went 12 - 4, and Schroeder had Monk, Clark, Sanders, and Didier, with Warren at TE and George Rogers running, all behind the prime Hogs.

Schroeder was not a very good QB. That was obvious after the NFC playoff loss 17-0 to the Giants. That's why Beathard dealt him for Lachey. What a trade! Schroeder lasted how long after that with the Raiders - a season? This proves two things: a great o-line and receivers can make even a mediocre QB good, and Schroeder was never a particularly good QB. This should proved to every one here that it's a better bet to use your pick on o-line than trying to win the franchise QB lottery, especially with the two clowns in the FO we have evaluating talent.

[old-timer]

[quote="SkinsJock"the real problem right now is who could we start as QB given the condition of the line and the other players on offense - I do not think Campbell is very good at all but I do not agree that we should just try another QB just because "we" think it might help - I think if Zorn (or any coach that had input) thought that a QB change might help this team then that would happen - we need a lot of help for this offense but putting someone else in there as QB just because a bunch of ignorant fans think it is going to make this offense work better is not what is going to happen - that's fantasy football stuff

these coaches are trying to win games - the coaches and players may not have what it takes to do that but in my opinion they are trying to win this game this week

you want to change the QB make the effort to be the guy that can do that [/quote]

Oh, okay. Well, I'll start saving up my $800 million tomorrow. In the meantime, I'll just say that Campbell does not have the ability to hit quick slants and timing patterns like Collins can. Collins may not have a big future here or anywhere else, but given the state of our line, and WR's, we need someone who can make the quick accurate throws and good decisions, because this gives us the best chance to win given the current state of our team. I agree that Campbell would be much better, maybe even very good given plenty of time by a great O-line (very similar to Rypien and Williams), but again - that's the ideal world and we don't live there.

[Champsturf]

So why hasn't Garcia been signed and named the starter? I would've done this after week 2. Probably because this would be a good move for the team, but a bad move for Campbell...WAAAAH! Bench the turd and have Garcia start the rest of the games. I'd like to be proud of at least one more win, rather than finish 2-14, which looks very much like a reality at this point.

[so.il.SKINSFAN]

So why hasn't Garcia been signed and named the starter? I would've done this after week 2. Probably because this would be a good move for the team, but a bad move for Campbell...WAAAAH! Bench the turd and have Garcia start the rest of the games. I'd like to be proud of at least one more win, rather than finish 2-14, which looks very much like a reality at this point.

Yeah I agree, Garcia should've been brought in a long time ago.

[SkinsJock]

.... I'll just say that Campbell does not have the ability to hit quick slants and timing patterns like Collins can. Collins may not have a big future here or anywhere else, but given the state of our line, and WR's, we need someone who can make the quick accurate throws and good decisions, because this gives us the best chance to win given the current state of our team. I agree that Campbell would be much better, maybe even very good given plenty of time by a great O-line (very similar to Rypien and Williams), but again - that's the ideal world and we don't live there.

psssst - this thread is not about Campbell - this thread is about whether he has improved or not - that's it - we all (well most of us) agree that he is not a very good QB

[Irn-Bru]

.... I'll just say that Campbell does not have the ability to hit quick slants and timing patterns like Collins can. Collins may not have a big future here or anywhere else, but given the state of our line, and WR's, we need someone who can make the quick accurate throws and good decisions, because this gives us the best chance to win given the current state of our team. I agree that Campbell would be much better, maybe even very good given plenty of time by a great O-line (very similar to Rypien and Williams), but again - that's the ideal world and we don't live there.

psssst - this thread is not about Campbell - this thread is about whether he has improved or not - that's it - we all (well most of us) agree that he is not a very good QB

I've given up on trying to make this distinction. I think some people will read every single non-critical statement about Campbell as a whole-hearted endorsement of him as a starting QB.