Closer look at JC ---OFFICIAL STATS from opp 20yd -49yd lne

[RayNAustin]

And if anyone wants to see the difference between Jason Campbell and Jay Cutler ... here's Cutler without Brandon Marshall.

And this is against the Steelers. Campbell would not make this play. The best that he'd do is throw it away ... or turn and roll left and get sacked (with blocking to be blamed afterward)

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d ... nfirm=true

And you could just as easily post video of Cutlers 4 picks in week one. Campbell wouldn't make those plays either...Cherry picking one good or bad play makes no sense.

Did you watch the game with Jay Cutler and those 4 picks? Last I recalled 3 out of 4 picks I heard Chris Collingsworth say that it was on the receiver not on Cutler. And in two games I have seen receivers drop more then 5 balls that were catchable

First, it was an example. Secondly, we were not talking about picks. We're talking TDs. Jason already knows how to throw picks.

And if you are suggesting that Cutler and his picks would be a down grade from Campbell ... well ... I can't help you with that.

And let's give Cutler the same consideration you would give Campbell ... it's a new system ... new receivers ... new team ... give him time ... wait ... it only took Jay 1 game ... not three years.

But the real point is the play itself as a classic example: red zone, against a top defense ... Cutler, with two Steeler defenders blitzing unblocked, he was able to make that play for a TD, and didn't even take a big hit.

Campbell, in a similar situation, as has happened so many times, gets crushed or throws the ball away ... and everyone says "well, Jason didn't have a chance ... nobody blocked the blitz ... no QB could have done anything". Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. Good QBs make those kinds of plays ... bad QBs don't. And that is the difference.

Do you think the Bears beat the Steelers without Cutler? No Way. Cutler was 27 for 38, 236 yards and 2 TDs. Campbell, by comparison against the Steelers last year was 24 of 43 for 206 yards ZERO TDs. Completions were close, yards were close, points NOT CLOSE.

Same old story ... stats don't look all that bad, but he CAN'T SCORE. He's like a golfer who can drive the ball 325 yards, and can't putt. You drive for show, and putt for dough.

I did watch the game, and Cutler was terrible. Part of Cutlers game is that he throws terrible interceptions.

You argument, looking at an entire game or season makes more sense. Anyone can pick out one play and say it wasn't good. And I love how it's okay to make "excuses" for Cutlers four interceptions, but when Campbell has two td passes dropped, it's just part of the game that happens to everyone and is not a mitigating factor. If those two guys could catch, Campbell would be on pace for 24 TD's and 8 Int's and no one would be complaining. The great Cutler threw 25 TD's and 18 interceptions last season...

If you're trying to suggest that Campbell is better than Cutler ... you'll not get many sane people to agree with you. Campbell isn't even close.

Favre is the all time leader in interceptions. I suppose Campbell is better than Favre too?

Give it a rest ... now the debate has gone from ridiculous to just plain silly.

I had to edit this ... So IF those two passes were caught, Campbell would be on pace for WHAT???? 24 TD and 8 ints. Wow? hahahahaha

That's a big IF .... considering we won't be playing the Rams every week.

I HAVE HEARD EVERYTHING NOW.

[jeremyroyce]

Statistics in the NFL make me laugh sometimes, a QB can get credited for an 80yard TD even if he only through the ball a couple of yards and the receiver ran in the other 78..

At the moment a lot of teams are having QB issues (just look at kansas) , its early season and the players are still rusty.

Let me give you a statistic and let's see if you laugh here. Now, I don't have a link but I just got done watching NFL Total Access Thursday show and Rod Woodson said that since Jason Campbell has taken over as the starting QB we are ranked 26th in scoring.

last years QB rating

Campbell - 84.3
Favre - 81.0
Flacco - 80.3
Roeths..... - 80.1

Stats mean nothing

I don't care about QB rating, I care about points. And with Jason Campbell as the starting QB we rank 26th in scoring.

[jeremyroyce]

The only stat that matters is the W - L one

People are calling Campbell for being rubbish and use stats to back up the argument, I just wanted to show that stats are not worth the paper they are written on.

There are stats that are worth a paper written on. Stop making excuses for Jason Campbell.

[SnyderSucks]

The 2 drops are not reasons, just more excuses. On those first 4 trips inside the red zone, there were a lot more plays than those two plays from which the Redskins could have scored.

In case you were wondering, Campbell threw a total of three passes in those four trips into the redzone, including the 2 drops. Yep, that's a lot of plays he failed to make.

[jeremyroyce]

And if anyone wants to see the difference between Jason Campbell and Jay Cutler ... here's Cutler without Brandon Marshall.

And this is against the Steelers. Campbell would not make this play. The best that he'd do is throw it away ... or turn and roll left and get sacked (with blocking to be blamed afterward)

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d ... nfirm=true

And you could just as easily post video of Cutlers 4 picks in week one. Campbell wouldn't make those plays either...Cherry picking one good or bad play makes no sense.

Did you watch the game with Jay Cutler and those 4 picks? Last I recalled 3 out of 4 picks I heard Chris Collingsworth say that it was on the receiver not on Cutler. And in two games I have seen receivers drop more then 5 balls that were catchable

First, it was an example. Secondly, we were not talking about picks. We're talking TDs. Jason already knows how to throw picks.

And if you are suggesting that Cutler and his picks would be a down grade from Campbell ... well ... I can't help you with that.

And let's give Cutler the same consideration you would give Campbell ... it's a new system ... new receivers ... new team ... give him time ... wait ... it only took Jay 1 game ... not three years.

But the real point is the play itself as a classic example: red zone, against a top defense ... Cutler, with two Steeler defenders blitzing unblocked, he was able to make that play for a TD, and didn't even take a big hit.

Campbell, in a similar situation, as has happened so many times, gets crushed or throws the ball away ... and everyone says "well, Jason didn't have a chance ... nobody blocked the blitz ... no QB could have done anything". Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. Good QBs make those kinds of plays ... bad QBs don't. And that is the difference.

Do you think the Bears beat the Steelers without Cutler? No Way. Cutler was 27 for 38, 236 yards and 2 TDs. Campbell, by comparison against the Steelers last year was 24 of 43 for 206 yards ZERO TDs. Completions were close, yards were close, points NOT CLOSE.

Same old story ... stats don't look all that bad, but he CAN'T SCORE. He's like a golfer who can drive the ball 325 yards, and can't putt. You drive for show, and putt for dough.

I did watch the game, and Cutler was terrible. Part of Cutlers game is that he throws terrible interceptions.

You argument, looking at an entire game or season makes more sense. Anyone can pick out one play and say it wasn't good. And I love how it's okay to make "excuses" for Cutlers four interceptions, but when Campbell has two td passes dropped, it's just part of the game that happens to everyone and is not a mitigating factor. If those two guys could catch, Campbell would be on pace for 24 TD's and 8 Int's and no one would be complaining. The great Cutler threw 25 TD's and 18 interceptions last season...

We all understand that there were two droppd passes, but even the great QB'S had dropped passes it's what you do after something like that happens. Did Jason will his way to get into the end zone? No. I think it's amazing that you never pointed out all the balls that Jason over threw or under threw on his receivers that could have scored a TD. Or the two timeouts that he wasted in the first game that hurt us at the end of that game, or that fumble that he had that gave the Giants 7 points.

[Fios]

Did Jason will his way to get into the end zone?

Yes, it's a question of will

[jeremyroyce]

Did Jason will his way to get into the end zone?

Yes, it's a question of will

You know what I mean. Please, don't tell me that I have to explain it.

[Fios]

Did Jason will his way to get into the end zone?

Yes, it's a question of will

You know what I mean. Please, don't tell me that I have to explain it.

Yes, actually, you do because I can't begin to fathom how Jason's alleged lack of will is somehow to blame here.

[Irn-Bru]

Do you even know what "hyperbole" means? I'm not exaggerating anything, and my statements are to be taken literally.

Hyperbole was the only way I could make sense of your statement. If you really think the Redskins have the worst offense in the league, then the relevant question is, what are your criteria for saying so? Even the ONLY criterion you listed — and a questionable metric at best, especially using a sample size of just two games — shows that the Redskins are not the worst. So what else am I to say.

Sorry, I'm just not one of them. And I'm not very fond of excuses either.

Then it will be interesting to see your explanation for the cognitive dissonance: your infatuation with facts and measurements and the failure of your own arguments to live up to them.

[Countertrey]

Finally! This thread is getting interesting!

[Fios]

The sad truth is that right now at least, the Redskin offense is the worst in the NFL ... if we're going to be completely honest.

How do you arrive at that conclusion? Granted, being second last in total points scored is not a point in their favor. But the team is 19th in yards per game, 15th in yards per play, 8th in third down conversions, they're the 6th least penalized offense, they're 18th in first downs per game and they're 19th in time of possession. I do not -- for a second -- believe this offense is without some serious flaws and I know playing the "hey, we're not worst" game is somewhat depressing but the fact is, they simply are not. Not even close. And, recognizing that it sinks pretty much everything I just wrote, we're talking about TWO games so coming to any conclusion at this point is kind of silly.

PS If Devin Thomas and Mike Sellers had caught those TD passes, the Skins go from second last in scoring to 19th. Again, not spectacular but maybe not as bad as it's being made out to be.

You know that old saying "if grandma had balls ...she'd be your grandpa" And those two plays prevented the offense from scoring a single TD? I tell you this, when you run 60 plays in a game, there are many more than 2 opportunities to score.

First, those 2 drops prevented them from scoring two touchdowns. You can't just dismiss those as irrelevant because they are inconvenient to the hyperbole you want to engage in. Note I never argued that the offense maximized each of its possessions so I have no idea why you felt the need to make that point.

My rationale for saying the Redskin offense is the worst, is based on the fact that the offense is next to last in points. And the only team under them are the Rams offense that we just played the AT HOME, and only out scored them by 2 points ... I'd say we're worse than the Rams offense UNLESS you believe that the Rams defense is at the level of the Redskin defense? (I don't think anyone would agree with that) This is a direct comparison, so either the Rams defense is pretty close to the Redskin defense, or our offense is worse than theirs. It's one or the other. Now, that doesn't mean that this can't change ... but right now, after 2 games, the Redskin offense is the worst. Period.

.... I addressed all of this, you're just regurgitating the same argument without bothering to address mine, which, I know, is your MO. You're basing an entire conclusion on one metric, which, granted is weighted more heavily but also is not the sole measuring stick.

And this isn't anything new. The SAME SITUATION that we all witnessed during the final 9-10 games in 2008. We finished the last 10 games last year averaging 11-12 points? So you tell me what's different?

They're MUCH better on third down, for starters and they average more yards per play. So they have improved in some key areas, including penalties. I already conceded the scoring thing, so what is your point otherwise?

Look, our defense has been solid, and I'd say most assuredly that they are head and shoulders better than the Rams defense. To be blunt, the Rams defense is actually one of the worst ... and we couldn't score a TD. That we were stymied and kept from scoring a TD by THAT defense is pathetic ... drops or no drops ... pathetic.

Again, I never argued anything to the contrary here, this is a non-starter

The 2 drops are not reasons, just more excuses. On those first 4 trips inside the red zone, there were a lot more plays than those two plays from which the Redskins could have scored. And MANY more plays outside of that red zone from which we RARELY seem to score .... at least according to the statistical record outside the 20 yard line.

Just because you refuse to see them as reasons doesn't mean they aren't. And AGAIN I never said the offense was prolific. YOU said it's the worst, I said it is not.

Forget Campbell's yards, and completion % ALREADY.

OK, since I never brought them up, I will.

This offense has had trouble scoring points with two different offensive systems and two different coaches. The common denominator here is the QB ... Proof? Because WE ALREADY KNOW what happened in 2007 when there was a change at QB. We went from ZERO points in the first 28 minutes of the Chicago game to 24 points in the other 32 minutes ... and the ONLY difference was the QB. This isn't speculation. This is fact.

What does having two different offensive systems have to do with this? If anything, that is a point in Jason's favor. Also, wow, one whole game ... what's the phrase for that? Oh yes, statistically insignificant.

And this fact has been denied so often, and so many excuses made that common sense is being ignored.

Yes, everyone else is ignoring common sense. Again, you didn't bother to address any of my points.

If you had a teenager who wrecked the family car 8 times in two years, exactly when would you disregard bad luck and unfortunate circumstances and take the keys away? The argument that this teenager drove the car 100 times ... so his percentage was 92 safe trips and only 8 bad ones is the same logic being used to defend Campbell.

That is such tortured and specious logic that I'm not going to address it any further.

[Chisel Monkey]

I have to say that I have, for the most part, been a Campbell supporter. That being said, the argument about completion percentage, QB rating etc, when compared to other quarterbacks isn't always fair either.

The system is going to play a large factor in these stats. Some systems are going to have a higher percentage of throws that will go for completions. Should we look at the completion percentages of a QB throwing mostly screens and high percentage dump offs and check downs and compare them to a QB who is airing the ball down the field and hitting the big plays. It really does not seem fair to compare.

The ultimate job of an offense is to score as many points as possible. Ball control and time of possession, in my opinion, is overrated and sometimes can be deceiving. It would be great to actually see the big play return to our offense.

[RayNAustin]

Hyperbole was the only way I could make sense of your statement.

I don't think that fits the definition of hyperbole .... that you can't make sense of something. Confusion; perplexity, bewilderment ... and a host of other terms that might be viewed as derogatory for which I won't include.

If you really think the Redskins have the worst offense in the league, then the relevant question is, what are your criteria for saying so? Even the ONLY criterion you listed — and a questionable metric at best, especially using a sample size of just two games — shows that the Redskins are not the worst. So what else am I to say.

I thought I was perfectly clear ... read my lips .... P O I N T S. That is my criteria, which is the same criteria that determines who wins and who loses. Now just what is this hyperbole about points being a questionable metric (at best) hmmmm?

Then it will be interesting to see your explanation for the cognitive dissonance: your infatuation with facts and measurements and the failure of your own arguments to live up to them.

My arguments are certainly clear, coherent, and understood and agreed with by several others. Therefore, it is your cognitive issues .. i.e confusion and bewilderment about the relative importance of points being scored, and how that relates to good, bad and worst when speaking of a particular NFL offense.

And you may continue to insist that other statistics such as QB rating, or total yards, or any other collection of statistics you cite are more relevant, while dismissing points scored if you care to. But you'll be wrong, each and every time. And it doesn't take exceptional cognitive abilities to recognize that.

[SkinsJock]

Look everyone is complaining JC has not had enough red zone opp to make plays....So I analyzed statisically why Zorn feels this way. I Personally feel what a QB does from opponents 49yd -20yd line---IS JUST AS IMPORTANT IF NOT MORE....Given the fact once you get inside the 20 things get very crowded and a teams playbook is limited ...well fellas brace yourself here we go--these r combined 08-09 stats with comparisons
ATT COMP PCT YDS TD INT
JC 170 99 58 996 (0) 4

Romo 126 76 61 949 6 6

Eli 195 122 62 1432 7 4

Flacco 185 103 56 1373 7 5

and on and on it goes- I could compare him to every qb if i want
For a quick measuring stick in 18 attempts Mark Sanchez has already thrown a TD from this range something campbell has NOT in his last 170 attempts

Lastly---HERE IT COMES..I studied EVERY QB in the NFL from 08 AND 09...Jason Campbell IS THE ONLY QB IN THE LEAGUE that has not scored from this distance when combining both years --before you ask--UH yes even JRussell has thrown few (actually Carson Palmer doesnt but he doesnt qualify due to injury and not enough total throws ...he threw only 40 attempts combined)

Guys this is why Zorn calls games the way he does ...IMO....and its also why our FO was scrabbling for new QB ....This is beyond impotent statistics

I will let you all debate my findings....so let me pound this home

Over the last 18 games JASON CAMPBELL IS THE ONLY STARTING QB IN THE LEAGUE THAT HAS NOT THROWN A TD from the opponents 49yd to 20ydline......
and since 2007 on ----304 attempts---1 touchdown

I'm not sure I understand - I am an Aussie NFL fan so please excuse my stupidity - I see the comparisons to these other QBs but can you just let me in on which QB on our team had any stats to make a comparison with?

This is our QB - we don't have an option

[RayNAustin]

First, those 2 drops prevented them from scoring two touchdowns. You can't just dismiss those as irrelevant because they are inconvenient to the hyperbole you want to engage in. Note I never argued that the offense maximized each of its possessions so I have no idea why you felt the need to make that point.

Because inevitably, and quite consistently the many plays which Campbell screws up each game are always overlooked, ignored, or explained away as really being caused by something or someone else other than Campbell's individual failures. Yet, some never miss an opportunity to highlight other failures as proof that Jason is some kind of victim of poor support, as if ONLY Jason suffers dropped passes, blitzes, sacks.

Yawn .... I addressed all of this, you're just regurgitating the same argument without bothering to address mine, which, I know, is your MO. You're basing an entire conclusion on one metric, which, granted is weighted more heavily but also is not the sole measuring stick.

Only to the extent that it's in response to the same lame, tired excuses that have been regurgitated and recycled from 2007. They were lame then, and totally irrelevant now.

It was Gibbs conservative offense ... then it was a playbook too complex .. then receivers too short ... then poor o-line blocking ... dropped passes ...

Then last year, it was another new system (forget the fact that he never learned the old one), then it was injuries and poor protection.

This year, now that the system isn't new any longer, and pass blocking has been good, it's the freaking receivers again, and the running game that's the problem, and conservative play calling by the second coach. What excuse did I miss ? And what new one has been presented that hasn't already been kicked to death the previous two seasons?

They're MUCH better on third down, for starters and they average more yards per play. So they have improved in some key areas, including penalties. I already conceded the scoring thing, so what is your point otherwise?

You already conceded the point thing? How big of you. YOU CAN'T DENY IT yet you continue to insist that points are only a part of it, while citing other stats you think show something more meaningful. In the absence of points, none of the other stats mean a thing.

But let's be clear and accurate .. points per game are down from last year by almost 4 points (16.6 to 13) .. so are yards per game down.. the big improvement you cite is .3 yards (1 foot) per play? From 5.0 to 5.3? WOW. You're really reaching. 5.3 sucks too, and ain't exactly what I call measurable improvement. But it does fit the definition of "Hyperbole" i.e. exaggerated statements not to be taken seriously.

Just because you refuse to see them as reasons doesn't mean they aren't. And AGAIN I never said the offense was prolific. YOU said it's the worst, I said it is not.

You're wrong. And I clearly outlined the the facts about why. I don't expect us to continue being the worst, but up to now, we certainly are.

What does having two different offensive systems have to do with this? If anything, that is a point in Jason's favor. Also, wow, one whole game ... what's the phrase for that? Oh yes, statistically insignificant.

Well let's see ... how many systems and coaches do we need to go through before we look at the player as the problem? And no, this isn't in Jason's favor .. all this proves is that he couldn't run Saunders offense in the second year any more effectively than he is running Zorn's system in the second year. That was kinda what I was driving at.

Yes, everyone else is ignoring common sense. Again, you didn't bother to address any of my points.

What point. That points aren't the most important point. That point?

That is such tortured and specious logic that I'm not going to address it any further.

No .. it's quite appropriate when we've watched a multi-millionaire grown man treated and coddled like a learning challenged cub scout for 3 + years.

[SkinsJock]

OK! I just read through all the posts - what's new? Campbell is not a great QB? well hooray! THAT's NEWS

He's our QB and we have issues scoring points? OH NO! who could tell?

This is really new infoormation and what's even more "informative" is it's made up from 'stats" - just bend them or twist them, they tell a different 'story' every time

give me a break


I am not a Campbell fan by any measure but I would love him to have career day as our QB tomorrow



some of you guys make me wonder about how you must behave as you watch these guys trying to win a game wearing the B&G

[crazyhorse1]

I would like to bow out now and do so with a final suggestion. I suggest that Ray concede that we do have a weak OL, lack lustre WR's, a flawed running game, and an offense that becomes too conservative in the red zone--and after that concession say with conviction that our touchdown problem is mostly Jason's fault and that all of the above are just excuses.

Come on Ray. You can do it. Show us how much you know about football being a team game.

[RayNAustin]

I would like to bow out now and do so with a final suggestion. I suggest that Ray concede that we do have a weak OL, lack lustre WR's, a flawed running game, and an offense that becomes too conservative in the red zone--and after that concession say with conviction that our touchdown problem is mostly Jason's fault and that all of the above are just excuses.

Come on Ray. You can do it. Show us how much you know about football being a team game.

I suggest you concede that the common denominator in the struggle to score points is Jason Campbell. Concede the FACT that the noodle armed career backup, Todd Collins, proved that you CAN score 26 points a game, and win with those lousy receivers, and the no account o-line, and the poor running game that .... gasp ... led the NFL for the first half of the season last year until it was run into the ground covering for, and carrying a dead weight QB that couldn't throw a TD pass if you put three receivers in the end zone at half time, while the defense was in the locker room.

[jeremyroyce]

Did Jason will his way to get into the end zone?

Yes, it's a question of will

You know what I mean. Please, don't tell me that I have to explain it.

Yes, actually, you do because I can't begin to fathom how Jason's alleged lack of will is somehow to blame here.

Ok here is my meaning of will. Being determined to get that ball in the end zone even when being faced with adversity. Taking over a game when need to. Bringing his team back from behind. Going in the 4th Quarter and behind two touchdowns knowing that as long as Jason Campbell is on the field we are in this game. That's what I mean by will.

[MEZZSKIN]

How did this thread morph into a Red Zone thread and those 2 big Drops...isn't there a thread for that

Were talking about a 21-49yd line here!!

And further more these stats were not bent twisted etc etc..

All I did was plainly list Factual statistics on JC from a criticial distance on field--once again called STRIKING DISTANCE

Agreed all is not perfect with our OLINE recievers etc...buit how gods name does that defend
304 attempts ---1 touchdown
Over his last 170 plus ZERO

The numbers are too damn large to ignore and dismiss ...and like what was said earlier people can conjure up 1100 excuses...its doesn't change

JC IS WORST QB in the NFL(via TD production) from this range over the last 3 years

Btw please take red zone and ur mike sellers drops comment --to the RED ZONE thread

[Irn-Bru]

Hyperbole was the only way I could make sense of your statement.

I don't think that fits the definition of hyperbole .... that you can't make sense of something.

No, but what does that have to do with what I said? Your argument was incoherent if taken literally, so I assumed you were exaggerating for rhetorical effect. Hyperbole means exaggerating for rhetorical effect. Hence, I thought you were using hyperbole.

If you really think the Redskins have the worst offense in the league, then the relevant question is, what are your criteria for saying so? Even the ONLY criterion you listed — and a questionable metric at best, especially using a sample size of just two games — shows that the Redskins are not the worst. So what else am I to say.

I thought I was perfectly clear ... read my lips .... P O I N T S. That is my criteria, which is the same criteria that determines who wins and who loses.

Now just what is this hyperbole about points being a questionable metric (at best) hmmmm?

It's not hyperbole to use points scored as your only metric. It is hyperbole to say that's your only metric and then try to claim that the Redskins have the worst offense in the NFL. See?

My arguments are certainly clear, coherent, and understood and agreed with by several others. Therefore, it is your cognitive issues .. i.e confusion and bewilderment about the relative importance of points being scored, and how that relates to good, bad and worst when speaking of a particular NFL offense.

Have you figured out yet that when using your stated criteria your conclusion is wrong? There's no opinion about it. That's my main critique.

As for the issue regarding the best way to measure an offense: yes, I think that you need a mix of statistics and several angles to be able to make claims about the relative merits of an offense in the NFL. The highest scoring team doesn't always have the best offense, because there are more factors involved. It's a complicated thing. That's so obvious to me that I don't have much interest in discussing it.

I know that you disagree with this, and that's OK with me. Besides, it's actually a distraction from the main point. You said that the Skins have the worst offense. Even using your own criteria, you are wrong on this point. The Skins are not the lowest-scoring offense.

(And, I'd argue, using a much more realistic assessment of the offense would show this even more strongly. And furthermore, this conversation is a little premature to rely only on the stats, since there have only been 2 games played. But again, all of that is beside the point to some extent.)

[PulpExposure]

Last year he said quite matter of factly that he likes playing from the shotgun because he loses sight of the receivers and doesn't see them as well from under center. BIG RED FLAG Zorn's offense ... three step drops ... play action all take place from under center. Pro Football is played from under center, and a pro QB shouldn't even think something like this, much less say it out loud.

You know, this always stuck in my head, and I wondered if it was really true.

And today, I learn...not really. (ESPN Insider)

In 1995, three full years before Peyton Manning was taken with the No. 1 overall pick, the number of NFL pass plays based out of the shotgun formation was at 6.9 percent. It's part of the reason Manning made more sense than Ryan Leaf at No. 1. He took the bulk of his snaps under center at Tennessee, whereas Leaf worked out of a shotgun spread that often utilized four wideouts. Last year, among quarterbacks that threw at least 150 passes, many of the league's elite threw a great percentage from the gun. Start with Manning, who threw a remarkable 74.5 percent of his passes from the shotgun in 2010. Aaron Rodgers was also higher than Roethlisberger at 66.1 percent. Tom Brady is at 62.8 percent. Name a top quarterback, and he was often passing from the gun. In 2010, 37.5 percent of all NFL throws, period, were from the shotgun. Not just third down -- all throws.

Well, I could be misinterpreting this, because Big Ben, Manning, and Rodgers are bums and don't know what they're doing, right? Right?

Welcome to the Shotgun Age, Ray.

[broomboy]

Last year he said quite matter of factly that he likes playing from the shotgun because he loses sight of the receivers and doesn't see them as well from under center. BIG RED FLAG Zorn's offense ... three step drops ... play action all take place from under center. Pro Football is played from under center, and a pro QB shouldn't even think something like this, much less say it out loud.

You know, this always stuck in my head, and I wondered if it was really true.

And today, I learn...not really. (ESPN Insider)

In 1995, three full years before Peyton Manning was taken with the No. 1 overall pick, the number of NFL pass plays based out of the shotgun formation was at 6.9 percent. It's part of the reason Manning made more sense than Ryan Leaf at No. 1. He took the bulk of his snaps under center at Tennessee, whereas Leaf worked out of a shotgun spread that often utilized four wideouts. Last year, among quarterbacks that threw at least 150 passes, many of the league's elite threw a great percentage from the gun. Start with Manning, who threw a remarkable 74.5 percent of his passes from the shotgun in 2010. Aaron Rodgers was also higher than Roethlisberger at 66.1 percent. Tom Brady is at 62.8 percent. Name a top quarterback, and he was often passing from the gun. In 2010, 37.5 percent of all NFL throws, period, were from the shotgun. Not just third down -- all throws.

Well, I could be misinterpreting this, because Big Ben, Manning, and Rodgers are bums and don't know what they're doing, right? Right?

Welcome to the Shotgun Age, Ray.

Very very, interesting!