BigHairedAristocrat
12-31-2009, 12:11 PM
Teams with shaky QB situations:
Raiders
Bills
Browns
Panthers
Bucs
Seahawks
Rams
Campbell would be a #2 or a #3 on all of those teams, except maybe the Raiders. Campbell could definitely find work of some kind in the NFL, but the skins are the most attractive option to him. Zorn may end up win Cleaveland, but there's no way in hell he'll want anything to do with Campbell there.
Campbell would be a #2 or a #3 on all of those teams, except maybe the Raiders. Campbell could definitely find work of some kind in the NFL, but the skins are the most attractive option to him. Zorn may end up win Cleaveland, but there's no way in hell he'll want anything to do with Campbell there.
I honestly don't see a team there where he wouldn't be the starter. Can you honestly say any of those teams are in better shape right now with their current options?
FRPLG
12-31-2009, 12:38 PM
Campbell would be a #2 or a #3 on all of those teams, except maybe the Raiders. Campbell could definitely find work of some kind in the NFL, but the skins are the most attractive option to him. Zorn may end up win Cleaveland, but there's no way in hell he'll want anything to do with Campbell there.
He starts for every single one of them except maybe Seattle if Hasslebeck is healthy. Not a single doubt.
It seems to me that the JC argument breaks down into 2 camps mostly.
1) Thinks he could be a good QB given the right line and tools around him. This group sorta sub-divides into the "That's not good enough versus That is perfectly fine" sub-argument.
2) Thinks he is the worst QB ever. Has never shown anything to make us think he could be an adequate NFL QB. Thinks he's a backup on teams that currently have zilch at QB.
Obviously I'm in the first group and lean to the "perfectly fine" side.
The second group...I don't know what Redskins games you've been watching. I'm not even sure you all have a great grasp of what it takes to win in the NFL. Or maybe I am crazy.
irish
12-31-2009, 12:39 PM
I honestly don't see a team there where he wouldn't be the starter. Can you honestly say any of those teams are in better shape right now with their current options?
I cant imagine that any of those teams would want to swap their shakey QB for a shakey JC. Sure he might start for those teams but he wont bring any improvement or upgrade to the QB position on those teams.
Paintrain
12-31-2009, 12:48 PM
He starts for every single one of them except maybe Seattle if Hasslebeck is healthy. Not a single doubt.
It seems to me that the JC argument breaks down into 2 camps mostly.
1) Thinks he could be a good QB given the right line and tools around him. This group sorta sub-divides into the "That's not good enough versus That is perfectly fine" sub-argument.
2) Thinks he is the worst QB ever. Has never shown anything to make us think he could be an adequate NFL QB. Thinks he's a backup on teams that currently have zilch at QB.
Obviously I'm in the first group and lean to the "perfectly fine" side.
The second group...I don't know what Redskins games you've been watching. I'm not even sure you all have a great grasp of what it takes to win in the NFL. Or maybe I am crazy.
Well one of the second group member said earlier in the thread that with other QB's that are having similar years to JC that we'd be a 8-9 win team right now so what does that tell you?
He starts for every single one of them except maybe Seattle if Hasslebeck is healthy. Not a single doubt.
It seems to me that the JC argument breaks down into 2 camps mostly.
1) Thinks he could be a good QB given the right line and tools around him. This group sorta sub-divides into the "That's not good enough versus That is perfectly fine" sub-argument.
2) Thinks he is the worst QB ever. Has never shown anything to make us think he could be an adequate NFL QB. Thinks he's a backup on teams that currently have zilch at QB.
Obviously I'm in the first group and lean to the "perfectly fine" side.
The second group...I don't know what Redskins games you've been watching. I'm not even sure you all have a great grasp of what it takes to win in the NFL. Or maybe I am crazy.
Yeah I don't quite understand it either. He's a middle of the pack QB on a flat out bad team. It's not too hard to imagine with a better cast around him, he could be much better.
I think there is zero chance of Campbell being a long-term starter anywhere in the league.
He is very high maintenance as far as coaching goes as he seems to be totally devoid of any football instincts at all.
Paintrain
12-31-2009, 12:54 PM
Teams with shaky QB situations:
Raiders
Bills
Browns
Panthers
Bucs
Seahawks
Rams
The only 2 teams I'd see that Campbell may not be the unquestioned starter in '10 on are the Bucs because they're committed to Josh Freeman and the Seahawks because Hasselbeck is still there.
Debates like this REALLY make me question the football acumen of some fans. Campbell's not going to any Pro Bowls but he's not Joey Harrington or Rex Grossman either. Not being able to see value in players that aren't superstars is basics in being a football fan vs. a Madden head with a rooting interest in a particular team.
*EDIT* ^...and my point is made for me.
Yeah the Bucs are probably riding with Freeman now, I just tossed them in there because it's not as if Freeman has shown that he is the unquestioned guy of the future just yet. Hasselbeck in Seattle battled injuries all year and is clearly on the back end of his career. I'm just guessing they could be looking to move on from him.
Paintrain
12-31-2009, 01:01 PM
Yeah the Bucs are probably riding with Freeman now, I just tossed them in there because it's not as if Freeman has shown that he is the unquestioned guy of the future just yet. Hasselbeck in Seattle battled injuries all year and is clearly on the back end of his career. I'm just guessing they could be looking to move on from him.
True, I could see Zorn going back there as QB coach if he doesn't go to Cleveland with Holmgren so there may be a fit.