Campbell's numbers dont lie

Stats are deceiving and they can be twisted to tell whatever story you want.
For instance lets take 2 QB's numbers and see how it goes.
QB "A" has 506 att 315 comp with a 62.3% and has 3,245yds / 6 ints
QB "B" has 474 att 288 comp with a 60.8% and has 3,692yds / 14 ints
Now by looking at this you will see that QB "B" had less att but he had more ints and about 25 more yds a game.It looks like QB "A" turned the ball over less therefore putting his team in a better position to win and had a higher comp% so he would seem to be more accurate if you go by the comp%. The only difference is that QB "B" had 28 TD's and QB "A" had 13 TD's and QB "B" went 14-2 and won the SB while QB "A" went 8-8 and missed the playoffs.
These are the numbers of 2004 brady and the 2008 JC. So again stats dont tell the whole story. There are many variables that are either added or taken away that will prove or disprove whatever the provider is trying to accomplish. So lets just stick with the W's and the L's which in the end are all that really matter.
You do realize, that if you had left the TD line in the initial stats, that qb B would have been seen as the better choice for the qb right. Comparable TD/INT rate(about 50%), but more production, higher yards/attempt. Stats don't tell the whole story but deceptive use, or less than full disclosure, often is why they don't.

[quote=irish;626600]

I'm sure some Colts fans were saying this after their QB's 28 INTs in 1998 and 100 INTs in the first 5 years of his career.
Most sucessful QBs have developed over a 5+ year period. We've been throwing away QBs far too frequently since Mark Rypien left town. It's clear that the offensive line is a giant gaping hole in our team and I still think Campbell can excel with some help. He should be given the opportunity at least and if he can't play well with a line (he's already shown he can, see last season's first half), then we should move on to the next project. We'll never find a franchise QB by keeping every one of them on such a short leash and not giving them the tools and protection to succeed. With the current line (play played well vs. Denver though), we're lucky that our QB has good mobility, or we could be suffering through far worse than a 3-6 record.

Yeah Peyton had alot of picks in his first yr but he also never threw less than 26 TD's in a season. There is promise there, especially when he went from 28 ints to 15 the next yr with the same number of td's.Plus they went 3-13 in the first season and 13-3 the next so why would you doubt your QB in that situation???

[quote=irish;626600]

I'm sure some Colts fans were saying this after their QB's 28 INTs in 1998 and 100 INTs in the first 5 years of his career.

Most sucessful QBs have developed over a 5+ year period. We've been throwing away QBs far too frequently since Mark Rypien left town. It's clear that the offensive line is a giant gaping hole in our team and I still think Campbell can excel with some help. He should be given the opportunity at least and if he can't play well with a line (he's already shown he can, see last season's first half), then we should move on to the next project. We'll never find a franchise QB by keeping every one of them on such a short leash and not giving them the tools and protection to succeed. With the current line (play played well vs. Denver though), we're lucky that our QB has good mobility, or we could be suffering through far worse than a 3-6 record.


I suspect they werent saying much since Manning had 138 TDs and over 20000 yards passing in his first 5 years.

Heck, Manning had almost ad many TD passes in his 3rd year alone (33) than JC has in his entire career (45).

You do realize, that if you had left the TD line in the initial stats, that qb B would have been seen as the better choice for the qb right. Comparable TD/INT rate(about 50%), but more production, higher yards/attempt. Stats don't tell the whole story but deceptive use, or less than full disclosure, often is why they don't.

That was the point for the ppl who put up Brady's stats and say that JC is in the same ballpark due to their similiar Comp% and yards.They leave out the TD's and W's so the stats that they provided would make the 2 seem even when like we both said can make whatever point the provider wants to make.

Y'all need to learn how to use the quote feature, because this is confusing as heck to follow.

Anyhow, the best thing for the Redskins is for Campbell to take control of the QB position and lead this team because then it's one less position for us to worry about. And we can focus on OL and RB.

But after 5 years, I expect more from Campbell at this point. He's a first round draft pick that we gave up a lot for. Is it his fault we did that? No, but we did and because of that he has to live up to certain expectations. Fair or not.

At some point, you have to stop looking at gradual progressions in various stat lines and just ask yourself "Do you trust Jason Campbell to carry the team on his back and lead them to victories?" I'm not there yet, and I think by now I should be.

Stats are deceiving and they can be twisted to tell whatever story you want...So lets just stick with the W's and the L's which in the end are all that really matter.

You do realize you are totally contradicting yourself right? Wins and losses is just another stat line.

That was the point for the ppl who put up Brady's stats and say that JC is in the same ballpark due to their similiar Comp% and yards.They leave out the TD's and W's so the stats that they provided would make the 2 seem even when like we both said can make whatever point the provider wants to make.Don't blame the tool being used, blame the person who is doing the twisting.

If you use statistics irresponsibly to try to support a poor point rather than using them as evidence to arrive at the proper conclusion, they are worthless.

The difference between Brady, 03 and Brady, 04 can be seen in the conventional stats at PFR, but is only really, really obvious once you look deeper.

This is the Football Outsiders' QB chart for 2003 (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb2003), and this is it for 2004 (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb2004). On the 2003 list, Brady shows up around names like Kitna, McNabb, Brad Johnson, and Testeverde, and below the luminary trancendental passer Aaron Brooks. But in 2004, in the same offense with the same quality of weaponry, he reached levels near Manning, Trent Green, Culpepper, and Favre.

The bottom line is that in 2003, Tom Brady won a super bowl without outperforming Jason Campbell (2008 version) in any meaningful way. If you had cut off the analysis right there, you couldn't make an argument that Brady was better based on anything but a hunch that he would improve.

Once you extend Brady's career past three years as a starter, you can see he turned into one of the best passers of all time. You can see it in the meticulous study he puts into every game he plays, the thing that separates him from the Jay Cutlers and Daunte Culpeppers of the world. Brady has since become a great player.

I don't know anyone who thinks that if you kept Jason Campbell in the same offense he's in now another year, he'd wind up being a top five quarterback next year. No one, myself included, has the balls to predict that. It's happened before, but players who have a fifth year swoon the way Campbell has usually end up as journeymen. For those who aren't forced out the door, you usually end up with a whole bunch of seasons that look like Campbell's 08. And you can win with that, but again, you'll have to actually put some real talent on the offense, and not expect Campbell to eventually figure out how to turn water into wine. That's not happening anytime soon.

At some point, you have to stop looking at gradual progressions in various stat lines and just ask yourself "Do you trust Jason Campbell to carry the team on his back and lead them to victories?" I'm not there yet, and I think by now I should be.Inevitably though, the answer to this question is somewhere between "yes" and "could anyone?"

It's a poor phrasing of a larger question we are no closer to answering than we were a year ago. I have all the trust in the world that if theres a game that can be won by a single quality drive at the end of the game, Jason Campbell can get us there, but it's not like our games ever come down to one offensive drive in the final four minutes.

And it's a big reason that people are so (relatively) inconclusive on Campbell. He's gone a long time here without ever having a signature moment, but all of our games seem to be decided by turnover margin, offensive line play, and whether the defense shows up. We're never in a situation where the quarterback needs to score and punting is not an option. Carolina ran out the final five minutes on us in our close game, Collins was inexplicably floundering around the next week, and every other opponent has been up comfortably in the fourth quarter on us. Including Detroit, somehow.

Y'all need to learn how to use the quote feature, because this is confusing as heck to follow.

Anyhow, the best thing for the Redskins is for Campbell to take control of the QB position and lead this team because then it's one less position for us to worry about. And we can focus on OL and RB.

But after 5 years, I expect more from Campbell at this point. He's a first round draft pick that we gave up a lot for. Is it his fault we did that? No, but we did and because of that he has to live up to certain expectations. Fair or not.

At some point, you have to stop looking at gradual progressions in various stat lines and just ask yourself "Do you trust Jason Campbell to carry the team on his back and lead them to victories?" I'm not there yet, and I think by now I should be.

Thats basically what it all comes down to and when you watch games like the one vs Denver and he is either missing or over throwing open wr's it makes you wonder if he can turn it on in a must score situation. This is the NFL, you arent going to have many blown coverages by the defense or 5yds of separation between your wr and the db on every play but when those scenerios do present themselves you must make those plays and from what we have seen i cant say id feel too confident in a 2 minute situation with JC under Center.

Carson Palmer is a very good QB and no offense to JC, but JC is not in his league. You can't compare the two.

Anyone who knows anything about football knows this. Stats are just like politicians.....they never tell the truth.