Redskins Insider - JC Through 15 Games

JC Through 15 Games - Redskins Insider (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/2007/11/jc_through_15_games.html#more)

I put a link to this blog in the Boswell thread, but I thought it was pretty interesting (ok, I know I said before that it was worthless to compare JC to other QBs, but what can I say). Seems to have something for everyone. Little JC talk, a little Pat Ramsey comparison, and even a jab at the coaching staff at the end there. JLC makes a good point. For all those who like making the conservative playcalling argument (constantly) that point about how they have put the ball on the ground and avoided throwing the ball after a couple of forced errors by JC is a nice observation.

"Also, check out J-Cam's numbers versus another NFL Qb thru 15 games:

Jason Campbell 15 55.99% 2817 16/13
Un-named Qb 15 53.40% 2846 15/12

Eerily similar, huh? Well who is the un-named Qb you ask???? None other than P-Ram, Patrick Ramsey. Interesting. I think J-Cam will be much better than Ramsey but they're pretty much even thru 15 games statistically passing wise. Scary huh."

Why did he have to go ther?

I just don't agree with his comparison to Romo. He's been in the league for what, 5 years now? He had 3 full seasons on the bench before he played. So of course he's heads and tails above the younger guys who didn't have the benefit of sitting and learning for 3 seasons.

Regarding his point here:

You guys tell me if this is a coincidence, or symbolic of a larger issue? So JC gets a ball tipped and picked off on the final Skins offensive play of the second quarter against Arizona a few weeks back, in what turned out to be a very tight game, and in the second half the Redskins run the ball 16 times and throw it just 7 and barely squeak by with a 2 point win. Then against the Jets Sunday he is hit as he tried to throw, gets picked off on a play that wasn't his fault - Barton made a heck of a catch and the protection failed - and then the rest of the way the Skins run the ball 21 times and throw it just twice as they come from behind to eventually beat NY in OT by 3. That's 37 rushes to 9 passes in what amounts to a full game post-INTs totaled all together.


Not sure I really agree there. After seeing the play over again I think JC held the ball a second too long, which he has done plenty of other times this year as well due to his inexperience.

We all know Gibbs is paranoid regarding turnovers, and I think it's obvious that the staff isn't 100% confident in turning JC loose just yet. I can really see both sides to this. As fans we sit here and say let him throw, but as coaches they don't want to put him in difficult situations when they have 2 quality backs and a sturdy D to lean on. Who knows, perhaps if we didn't lean on the running game in those games one or more of those close wins turn into a loss?

We all know Gibbs is paranoid regarding turnovers, and I think it's obvious that the staff isn't 100% confident in turning JC loose just yet. I can really see both sides to this. As fans we sit here and say let him throw, but as coaches they don't want to put him in difficult situations when they have 2 quality backs and a sturdy D to lean on. Who knows, perhaps if we didn't lean on the running game in those games one or more of those close wins turn into a loss?It's been a while since we played a team we thought we would have some difficultly playing. About a month to be exact.

We obviously called a lot of runs against both Arizona and New York. I'm not sure that's particularly conservative, I think we just decided it was the best way to attack them.

Anyway, the consequence was that the score in both those games was a lot closer than anyone thought it would be. Well, if your gameplan is to run the ball and play good D...well then, yeah the score is going to be close.

Some fans deem this playing to "not lose". Well, aside from how ridiculous that statement sounds...isn't not losing a good thing anyway.

The point is we could have lost to Arizona, but only because if you are trying to pace the game like the Redskins have, you don't have an allowance for a failed onside kick recovery.

The allowance for turnovers in Gibbs-style football isn't there, but it's not like you can totally prevent them from happening. You can just severly cut down on them. But it's NOT like our propensity to not turn the ball over is CAUSING the offense to not score and this is something our fans need to realize. Less turnovers=good. Inconsistency on offense=bad. Both are characteristic of the Washington Redskins this season, but they are not related.

If we turn the ball over against equal or lesser teams multiple times, we are going to get upset. Fortunately it hasn't happened yet this year, and we are 5-3, but I think thats something we really have to focus on this week.

Who cares how "conservative" we are being. If we don't turn the ball over, and we move the ball, the offense is doing its job.

I just don't agree with his comparison to Romo. He's been in the league for what, 5 years now? He had 3 full seasons on the bench before he played. So of course he's heads and tails above the younger guys who didn't have the benefit of sitting and learning for 3 seasons.I agree. Romo is a 5 year vet. Campbell is a three year vet. The three biggest jumps in a QBs development are:

1) year one to two
2) year three to four
and
3) year four to five

So Romo SHOULD be way ahead of JC in his development.

I would be a little worried though if by this time next year the gap isn't a bit closer.



Additionally, Campbell's completion percentage is about 8% better than it was last season, and very steady week to week. It still needs to go up a bit, but that's a jump Patrick never really made.

He doesn't have to be Romo per se. He just has to be a solid qb, which I think based on his performance so far is more than just possible. Aside from the team he plays for, there's a lot to like about Romo but I don't know if his style would fit in with a Gibbs coached team. There's a little too much Favre in him, no? It's exciting as hell to watch but I think coach Joe would have a heart attack the first time he underarmed a shuffle pass while being sacked after scrambling back 6 yards.

After 18 starts, don't annoint Romo just yet. He's pretty good, but I'm always wary of a guy who is really outperforming his completion percentage.

Either his completion percentage will improve, or his TDs will decline while his INTs increase.

I'm still playing the wait and see game with Romo.

My guess is that as he gets more confident as time goes on his int percentage is likely to go up. Cockiness = more willingness to take chances = turnovers.

And that 5 INT game.. DAMN. He should have been picked even 1-2 more times in that game.