Grade Jason Campbell

Agree with all of the positive evaluations. Just wanted to add that hitting his receivers in stride on long throws was something that has long been missing on offense. Nice to see it back. This kid can play. Loved the play when he shrug off a tackle and made a beautiful throw.

He did his part to put us in position to win the game. On the Mark Brunell scale, that's a D (sorry, couldn't resist).

A+/B-, he earned it.

But seriously, I think I'm being a bit generous, maybe overanalyzing the conditions (he certainly didn't have A level production, not even close). If you gave him an A, you must have loved the job Brunell did, or just are horribly biased.

I gave him a B+/A-, but would have given him an A had Lloyd caught that ball. With that completion, his stats would have been 20/34 for 252 and 2 TDs and 0 INTs; those are "A" numbers, especially for someone who's making their first start with an offense lacking two Pro-Bowlers (Portis & Moss). It's kind of unfair to hold Lloyd's inability to catch the ball against Campbell, but so be it.

I was very impressed by Campbell's play today. It seems to me that he is able to see the whole field and move through his progressions.. That is the great intangible for quarterbacks. Also his check downs are open in space which I think is a function of his arm strength. The defense has to respect the deep ball. I hate to admit it, but the Brunell haters were proved right to that extent today. His willingness to fire the ball downfield made this look like a different offense at times.

Having said that, I gave him a B because I think he can improve. He short-hopped a few easy throws. Also, I would like to see him show a little more enthusiasm and leadership out there. Being laid back is a shitty quality in a QB. But, those are things that can be fixed.

The kid can play. He can most definitely play.

I gave him a B+/A-, but would have given him an A had Lloyd caught that ball. With that completion, his stats would have been 20/34 for 252 and 2 TDs and 0 INTs; those are "A" numbers, especially for someone who's making their first start with an offense lacking two Pro-Bowlers (Portis & Moss). It's kind of unfair to hold Lloyd's inability to catch the ball against Campbell, but so be it.I said this before, but that ball was pretty and Lloyd probably should have had it, but don't ignore the fact that Ronde Barber's hand was right in his grill as the ball got away.

But that's why its a low percentage pass. Lots of chances for something to go wrong.

Lloyd usually doesn't get seperation, and he compensates in his game by making that type of catch. It certainly would have made Campbell's statline look a lot better (and I certainly don't hold it against Campbell), but it still perplexes me that people could be so unimpressed with Brunell, and are that quick to want to give Campbell an 'A'. If you use the same standard (which I'm not sure you can do, given the loss of Moss and Portis, but I'll continue), it was a sub-Brunell day. So 'A'? That's being biased.

I gave him a high grade because he did what he had to to put us in position to win. Then again...so did Brunell.

But because JC looks prepared, I now agree that he should be playing at this point in his career. Therefore, the switch was made at about the right time. Another "trust Gibbs" situation on my hands, if you will.

I said this before, but that ball was pretty and Lloyd probably should have had it, but don't ignore the fact that Ronde Barber's hand was right in his grill as the ball got away.

But that's why its a low percentage pass. Lots of chances for something to go wrong.

Lloyd usually doesn't get seperation, and he compensates in his game by making that type of catch. It certainly would have made Campbell's statline look a lot better (and I certainly don't hold it against Campbell), but it still perplexes me that people could be so unimpressed with Brunell, and are that quick to want to give Campbell an 'A'. If you use the same standard (which I'm not sure you can do, given the loss of Moss and Portis, but I'll continue), it was a sub-Brunell day. So 'A'? That's being biased.

I gave him a high grade because he did what he had to to put us in position to win. Then again...so did Brunell.

But because JC looks prepared, I now agree that he should be playing at this point in his career. Therefore, the switch was made at about the right time. Another "trust Gibbs" situation on my hands, if you will.

You must admit that Campbell holds the promise of taking this offense to places that Brunell simply couldn't. Brunell ran the offense on the kiddy field and with Campbell we've moved up to the big-boy field. The Bucs defense was definitely stretched at times today. Yes Brunell took to much blame, but on their central argument that Brunell's lack of arm strength/caution was choking the engine, I believe that the Brunell Bashers were thoroughly vindicated today.

given the situation:

1st pro start.

against a greedy TB pass D. I don't care what the rankings are, barber and bolden and brooks are some mean ball hawking defenders... I expected the worst.

not having ANY running game

not having a #1 wideout

he earned an A. Lloyd dropped that first pass. It hit him in the hands and thats all you can ask your QB to do. Also, his throws that were a little bit off, were usually erred on the side of caution... overexaggerated to the place the defender wasnt.

If you're going to miss, hit the ground, and not a defender... thats a good thing.

His stats would have been also better if the bucs hadn't gotten away with 2 pushouts. The one where lloyd came down on his head was a beautiful catch, and there was another one too...

I just hope our defense gets in order by next year...

It certainly would have made Campbell's statline look a lot better (and I certainly don't hold it against Campbell), but it still perplexes me that people could be so unimpressed with Brunell, and are that quick to want to give Campbell an 'A'. If you use the same standard (which I'm not sure you can do, given the loss of Moss and Portis, but I'll continue), it was a sub-Brunell day. So 'A'? That's being biased.

I am using different standards for Brunell and Campbell because (1) it was Campbell's first start and (2) Moss and Portis were injured. Neither one of us thought Campbell would look good today (I said he'd throw for 180 yards and throw 1 TD and 2 picks and you said he'd throw no TDs and 2 picks), but he exceeded our expectations. A 92 QB rating and 2 TDs and 0 picks is a good day for any first-time starter.

If it were Brunell, I would have given him a B instead of a B+/A-.

I am using different standards for Brunell and Campbell because (1) it was Campbell's first start and (2) Moss and Portis were injured. Neither one of us thought Campbell would look good today (I said he'd throw for 180 yards and throw 1 TD and 2 picks and you said he'd throw no TDs and 2 picks), but he exceeded our expectations. A 92 QB rating and 2 TDs and 0 picks is a good day for any first-time starter.

If it were Brunell, I would have given him a B instead of a B+/A-.


I agree 100%. If 2 years from now he has the same performance he gets a B at best. The 2TDs and 0 ints from this D at their home impressed the hell out of me for a first time start.

Game management looks like its instilled into the kids head. (one thing Ramsey didn't have....) If hes a big-play guy, who's hard to sack (and doesn't fall into the fetal position when someone touches his blind side... lol) and he manages the game well... he's going to be a great QB.

Now we have to work on the rest of the team...

NFL.com's evaluation of Campbell

NFL.com - NFL News (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9815696)

A-/B+

not much to say....no running game, no D, but still 2 TD's and no Int's or fumbles. He moved around in and out of the pocket and threw fairly well.


Jason Campbell
is
the FUTURE!
:httr: :point: :point: :httr: