Per Vinny Cerrato, JC is our QB this season!

Clearly like JC or not he has a job to do and that is WIN games PERIOD. If this year he is successful he should be here for a while if not hes gone plain and simple.

And the same applies to Zorn IMO.

Thats what I said last year reguarding Campbell. We've been saying "one more year" for him for too long.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Any trade for Jay Cutler would most likely involve either our 1st rounder or any future picks. In a year when we have so many other (more important) needs, and limited resources (cap/draft picks) getting rid of Campbell at the expense of draft picks is a high price to pay. I wouldn't even put QB play as one of the top two issues that we had last year, so risking so much and gamble that a new QB is going to fix everything is not a good idea.




With the PR nightmare that Cutler has caused, even if he had an average season, there would be issues in the locker room. Cutler would need to lead the team deep into the playoffs in order for morale not to be affected. You mentioned that QB is the most important position in the team, and I agree with you, now are you willing to risk the repercussions of getting rid of a well-liked/respected player in Campbell and replace him with someone like Cutler? I mean look at what the Jets went through with Favre last season (although not necessarily the the same situation, but close).

Jason Campbell played not even half a season the year that Saunder was brought in, therefore he didn't practice with the first-team more than half the season and during training camp. I think it's unfair to say that he was in Gibbs/Saunders system for two years in a row, when he wasn't the starter for half the season. Not to mention the whole issues mentioned by Paintrain with the game calling. Last season, Jason Campbell was the starting QB during training camp, the preseason and the regular season, and this would make the first time that he will (hopefully) enter a second year (after a full first year) in the same offense and with the same coach as the starting QB.

I honestly feel Gibbs/Saunders should have thrown him to the fire and make him start his second year. Instead, JC sat on the bench his rookie year and half of his second year, watching Mark Brunell throw 5 yd passes.

I guess thats your take on it - my take was its going to take years to fix our o-line and since it cant be done overnight, we're better off having a QB who gets rid of the ball quicker (to copensate for a line that allows the QB less time). I agree fixing the line is a priority - i guess i personally would rather lock the QB position up with a known comodity this year and not have to worry about getting a new QB next year. i think the basic premise i am coming from us just so different from everyone else - i am close to certain Campbell will fail in this system and we will need a new starting QB next year. I dont forsee any good free agent QBs becoming available, so that means drafting a QB, which is a huge gamble. The chances of us getting a good QB in the draft arent necessarily good. We'd probably have to trade up to get one of the big two, which means giving up even more picks. And if we take a QB further down, it likely means letting him sit on the bench a couple years... so that means 2-3 more years without the QB position resolved. QB is the most important position on a team. Having the right QB can compensate for a multitude of weaknesses, so long as they are not too glaring - look at how good Matt Ryan did last year behind a line that was worse than ours.

I also agree we could be in an entirely different situation now if Campbell had been named the starter his second year. Gibbs stuck with Brunell far too long and if Campbell had been the starter going into year 3, everything MIGHT have been clicking well enough that Snyder would have kept Saunders around for a 3rd year and we could have JC entering his 4th year in a system now that fits his skills perfectly. Instead we're stuck with Zorn trying to put a square peg in a round hole and the chances of success are slim to none. At this point, i view it as a near certainty that Zorn is going to be fired, which by default means Campbell is gone too. I mean, do you REALY think Campbell would want to stick around here to learn yet another offense?

I guess thats your take on it - my take was its going to take years to fix our o-line and since it cant be done overnight, we're better off having a QB who gets rid of the ball quicker (to copensate for a line that allows the QB less time). I agree fixing the line is a priority - i guess i personally would rather lock the QB position up with a known comodity this year and not have to worry about getting a new QB next year. i think the basic premise i am coming from us just so different from everyone else - i am close to certain Campbell will fail in this system and we will need a new starting QB next year. I dont forsee any good free agent QBs becoming available, so that means drafting a QB, which is a huge gamble. The chances of us getting a good QB in the draft arent necessarily good. We'd probably have to trade up to get one of the big two, which means giving up even more picks. And if we take a QB further down, it likely means letting him sit on the bench a couple years... so that means 2-3 more years without the QB position resolved. QB is the most important position on a team. Having the right QB can compensate for a multitude of weaknesses, so long as they are not too glaring - look at how good Matt Ryan did last year behind a line that was worse than ours.

- If Campbell or whatever other QB fails or even does average (but misses the playoff), Zorn will be fired and the team will and should be blown up. Trading for Cutler would make no sense, b/c you'd be doing what everyone accuses the Redskins FO of doing (drafting away picks, not grooming their own players, etc., etc.). So I don't see the rationale behind trading away Campbell and picks (once again, I believe trading for Cutler will cost us picks)

- I don't think your argument that Campbell will most certainly fail holds up given how well Campbell did during the first 8 games of the season. And no offense, but I have not heard any expert claim this (that Campbell will fail in Zorn's offense). Though many of them do see this upcoming season as do or die.


I also agree we could be in an entirely different situation now if Campbell had been named the starter his second year. Gibbs stuck with Brunell far too long and if Campbell had been the starter going into year 3, everything MIGHT have been clicking well enough that Snyder would have kept Saunders around for a 3rd year and we could have JC entering his 4th year in a system now that fits his skills perfectly. Instead we're stuck with Zorn trying to put a square peg in a round hole and the chances of success are slim to none. At this point, i view it as a near certainty that Zorn is going to be fired, which by default means Campbell is gone too. I mean, do you REALY think Campbell would want to stick around here to learn yet another offense?

- I think this is exactly why JC should be given this upcoming season to see if he succeeds. You argued that Campbell has been in the same system two years in a row before, and I argued against it since it was a season and a half, that doesn't give you the luxury of spending two offseasons/training camps with your coach.

- If JC is such a square peg, why was he successful in the first half of the season? I think the responsibility is on Zorn to make sure that Campbell succeeds in his system, and for 8 games, he did.

- Finally, I don't think anyone is arguing that Campbell should be declare our franchise QB for years to come. He has to prove that next year, if he doesn't, he'll be gone, along with Zorn and like I said the team will need to be blown up. Brining Cutler will cause the team to say that they are reloading, and use it as an excuse to patch things up and try to go with a half-assed team in 2010.

As I said in the sentence immediately before the sentence you quoted from, its a serious question because:

Campbell had experience and familiarity with Saunders system (he was in it two years), and it didnt "count for anything" then. It did not benefit him at all. He took no giant leaps forward. For that reason, i'm asking - if two years in the same system didnt work before, what makes you think it will work now?

Campbell had 20 starts in Saunders offense, not really enough of a body of work to properly judge how he could have done had they left Saunders in place to continue his development. My guess is he would have taken a nice leap forward in year 3. Plus you have to consider he was in just his 2nd and 3rd years under Saunders and was already in offense #2.

His numbers in Zorn year #1 showed improvement. His completion % was up, his INTs and fumbles were way down, and his overall QB rating took a nearly a 7 point jump. I'm pretty secure in saying I think in Zorn year #2 he's going to take another step forward. It's definitely premature to say he can't fit in this offense or be successful. He at least deserves a 2nd year to tell if he can be the guy or not.

As I said in the sentence immediately before the sentence you quoted from, its a serious question because:

Campbell had experience and familiarity with Saunders system (he was in it two years), and it didnt "count for anything" then. It did not benefit him at all. He took no giant leaps forward. For that reason, i'm asking - if two years in the same system didnt work before, what makes you think it will work now?
I've dissected and refuted your arguments on the Campbell thing before (as did GTripp), so I won't rehash. But bottom line (which you never responded to in other threads where we discussed this), how do you explain Campbell's Pro Bowl level numbers in early 2008 as "not being a good fit" for our system?

Campbell had 20 starts in Saunders offense, not really enough of a body of work to properly judge how he could have done had they left Saunders in place to continue his development. My guess is he would have taken a nice leap forward in year 3. Plus you have to consider he was in just his 2nd and 3rd years under Saunders and was already in offense #2.

His numbers in Zorn year #1 showed improvement. His completion % was up, his INTs and fumbles were way down, and his overall QB rating took a nearly a 7 point jump. I'm pretty secure in saying I think in Zorn year #2 he's going to take another step forward. It's definitely premature to say he can't fit in this offense or be successful. He at least deserves a 2nd year to tell if he can be the guy or not.

I'm not so sure I understand exactly what your basing that from? Remember Collins was just coming off a huge ending to that season.

JC in year two of Al's offense was below par IMO to begin with. I think that's when most within the org. really started to question whether this guy could be the next leader of this team.

As you recall when Al's guy Todd Collins got in the game after Cambell went down in week fourteen, someone that knew and understood what Al wanted we got on a roll and peeled of 4 big games straight and he lead us to a playoff birth.

If Joe & Al would have stayed who knows if JC would have seen a year number 3 as a starter, it could have very well been Collins at the helm. In my point of view even remembering Joe's final presser (Pre-Retirement) I gathered there would at least be a competion for the starting QB position for the following season as he would not commit to Cambell and I think that was a smart move on his behalf. Then we all know what happened Joe descided to step down.

I'm not so sure I understand exactly what your basing that from? Remember Collins was just coming off a huge ending to that season.

JC in year two of Al's offense was below par IMO to begin with. I think that's when most within the org. really started to question whether this guy could be the next leader of this team.

As you recall when Al's guy Todd Collins got in the game after Cambell went down in week fourteen, someone that knew and understood what Al wanted we got on a roll and peeled of 4 big games straight and he lead us to a playoff birth.

If Joe & Al would have stayed who knows if JC would have seen a year number 3 as a starter, it could have very well been Collins at the helm. In my point of view even remembering Joe's final presser (Pre-Retirement) I gathered there would at least be a competion for the starting QB position for the following season as he would not commit to Cambell and I think that was a smart move on his behalf. Then we all know what happened Joe descided to step down.

JC would have remained the starter had everyone come back. There's no way they would have pulled the plug on him after his first year as the starter for a 36 year old QB who got hot for 4 games.

I've dissected and refuted your arguments on the Campbell thing before (as did GTripp), so I won't rehash. But bottom line (which you never responded to in other threads where we discussed this), how do you explain Campbell's Pro Bowl level numbers in early 2008 as "not being a good fit" for our system?

Sorry if i missed your responses in the other thread, getting to your bottom line statement -

Campbell was NOT playing at a pro-bowl level early on in the season. All that talk was ridiculous at the time, especially him being talked about as MVP of the league, let alone the team. All campbell did in the first few games was just not throw interceptions... something which was primarily a result Zorn not letting him throw much and really giving him an elementary form of the offense to run. Obviously, when Zorn opened things up some, Campbell was asked to do more... and we all know how the last 8 games went. We did so well in the first half of the season because Campbell wasnt doing much and we were relying on Clinton Portis. As the season wore on, our line declined and so did Clinton. Zorn tried to open things up, he put more on Campbells shoulders, and Campbell couldnt handle it.

JC in year two of Al's offense was below par IMO to begin with. I think that's when most within the org. really started to question whether this guy could be the next leader of this team.

If Joe & Al would have stayed who knows if JC would have seen a year number 3 as a starter, it could have very well been Collins at the helm. In my point of view even remembering Joe's final presser (Pre-Retirement) I gathered there would at least be a competion for the starting QB position for the following season as he would not commit to Cambell and I think that was a smart move on his behalf. Then we all know what happened Joe descided to step down.If, 20 starts into a guys career, despite drafting absolutely zero offensive talent (save Campbell himself) since 2004, ANYONE in the organization is questioning his leadership skills, then that's a problem with the organization, not with Campbell.

And I'll just point this out quickly, Joe Gibbs didn't get where he was as a coach by giving up on a 25 year old promising QB for a 36 year old with fewer good games in 12 years in the league than the 25 year old has in 20 starts.

Campbell was NOT playing at a pro-bowl level early on in the season. All that talk was ridiculous at the time, especially him being talked about as MVP of the league, let alone the team. All campbell did in the first few games was just not throw interceptions... something which was primarily a result Zorn not letting him throw much and really giving him an elementary form of the offense to run. Obviously, when Zorn opened things up some, Campbell was asked to do more... and we all know how the last 8 games went. We did so well in the first half of the season because Campbell wasnt doing much and we were relying on Clinton Portis. As the season wore on, our line declined and so did Clinton. Zorn tried to open things up, he put more on Campbells shoulders, and Campbell couldnt handle it.Your hypothesis here is totally and completely factually incorrect at every corner.

But the funny thing is, it's totally necessary for the rest of the argument you've made in this thread to make sense.

You have to deny, deny, deny what has been accepted by fans and the media as common knowledge, but you can't provide one smidgen of evidence to the contrary. Only, you make a hypothesis that relies on the assumption that Campbell is everything that's wrong with the Skins offense to make sense (which obviously is why it makes sense to you. you believe that unconditionally). Except, that's exactly what you're trying to prove.

"I believe 'X'. Therefore, X is proven by the fact that 'Y', something else I believe, necessarily requires that X is true."

Circular logic? That's a basic logical fallacy is it not?

Your hypothesis here is totally and completely factually incorrect at every corner.

But the funny thing is, it's totally necessary for the rest of the argument you've made in this thread to make sense.

You have to deny, deny, deny what has been accepted by fans and the media as common knowledge, but you can't provide one smidgen of evidence to the contrary. Only, you make a hypothesis that relies on the assumption that Campbell is everything that's wrong with the Skins offense to make sense (which obviously is why it makes sense to you. you believe that unconditionally). Except, that's exactly what you're trying to prove.

"I believe 'X'. Therefore, X is proven by the fact that X is something I believe."

Circular logic? That's a basic logical fallacy is it not?
I realy hate to put it like this, but Campbell sssucks!!!!