How Will Campbell Be Handled?

Mattyk72



You seem to be saying that platooning can't be done gradually. Is that it?

What the heck is a gradual platoon??

So by playoff time Campbell is the starter? Do they alternate starts, snaps, series, quarters... what exactly do you have in mind for this platoon??

I'm sorry but the more I hear the more absurd this is sounding. Or actually the less I hear because you haven't given much detail.

Platoons at QB don't work in the NFL, that's the bottom line.

If you have a platoon it's because your team stinks, you don't have a clear-cut #1 guy, or you have injuries.

Once again I will ask for an example of a successful QB platoon in the NFL. And by successful I mean a platoon that at least got a team to the playoffs.

I'd also like to know what "gradual platoon" means

Mattyk72

What the heck is a gradual platoon??

The young QB's playing time might start with a series or two, with plays he handles well, planned and practised. Then, his playing time is increased gradually until the point where he might start and play an entire game.

Whether Campbell would be our starter for a final playoff run depends upon his progress. If it doesn't go well with him, we have Brunell fairly fresh over the final half of the season rather than the first half.

Platoons at QB don't work in the NFL, that's the bottom line.

It's a creative idea. The Browns did it. Most people thought it was a good way to handle a young QB and I agree.

Once again I will ask for an example of a successful QB platoon in the NFL. And by successful I mean a platoon that at least got a team to the playoffs.

I can't think of one. Platooning has been rare in the NFL.

On the other hand, it's not as though we're tossing away a better option. Mark isn't likely to do it on his own either.

My suggestion is an attempt to make the best of a less-than-ideal QB situation.

The longer we hold Campbell back, the longer it will take for him to adjust to playing qb. I could see holding him back if the offensive line couldn't protect him, but our line is a team strength and our qb isn't going to have to carry our offense anyway.

Holding him back by choice is usually a good thing. The longer we hold him back the more time he has to study and analyze what the veteran did in a particular situation. The more time the QB can learn a system the better off he is. Having a great O-line will make it easier on any QB.

Mattyk72

It's a creative idea. The Browns did it. Most people thought it was a good way to handle a young QB and I agree.



The Browns weren't a playoff caliber team with aspirations of a Super Bowl appearance. If I were the Browns, I probably would have done the same thing. What did they have to lose? They didn't have a supporting cast that would have taken either of their QBs to the playoffs. We have a QB that has taken us to the playoffs. We've given that same QB better WRs and an offensive coordinator. I could go on and on, but suffice it to say, for so many reasons, the Skins are not the Browns.

Oh, and this doesn't mean I view your Browns example as "irrelevant", It simply makes it "unconvincing" and "distinguishable" to me.

Once again I will ask for an example of a successful QB platoon in the NFL. And by successful I mean a platoon that at least got a team to the playoffs.

The Browns kinda used a platoon in 2002, but a lot of that was due to injuries.

Mattyk72



The young QB's playing time might start with a series or two, with plays he handles well, planned and practised. Then, his playing time is increased gradually until the point where he might start and play an entire game.

Whether Campbell would be our starter for a final playoff run depends upon his progress. If it doesn't go well with him, we have Brunell fairly fresh over the final half of the season rather than the first half.



It's a creative idea. The Browns did it. Most people thought it was a good way to handle a young QB and I agree.



I can't think of one. Platooning has been rare in the NFL.

On the other hand, it's not as though we're tossing away a better option. Mark isn't likely to do it on his own either.

My suggestion is an attempt to make the best of a less-than-ideal QB situation.

Well, I guess ultimately our perceptions of our QB situation differ, and since perceptions aren't worth debating what are we wasting our time over?

I could go on and on, but suffice it to say, for so many reasons, the Skins are not the Browns.

Hence making this whole debate irrelevant, don't you think?

Hence making this whole debate irrelevant, don't you think?

One could certainly make that point. ;)

Hence making this whole debate irrelevant, don't you think?

Irrelevant debates seem to be a theme when Huddle is involved.