View Single Post
Old 09-30-2009, 11:39 PM   #332
mike340
Special Teams
 
mike340's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 68
Posts: 322
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie

Campbell is OK, no better. I think he's worse than his statistics. He can't hit a wide-open receiver (especially in stride.)
In the first drive of our last two games he has missed wide-open possible TDs
2 weeks ago: underthrew a wide-open Kelly, and if he can't throw that route he can't throw a fade. (I've never seen him successfully complete a fade pass. Think about how that impacts the defensive schemes inside the 20.)
Last week he threw a bad pass "at" Santana Moss at the 3. The only time I can remember him throwing to Moss in stride (no leap or adjustment necessary) Moss turned into a TD this last week.

I don't remember him throwing nice bombs, the most enjoyable play to watch in football. His passes don't allow the receivers to make plays since they have to leave their feet most of time unless it's a pattern from side to side. For these reasons the wide receivers all of a sudden got TDs with Collins.

Another question I have:
Is it Zorn or Campbell who decides that 5 pass plays in a row will go to Moss, 3 in a row to Cartwright, etc? I can't see the field in the telecast so I don't know who's open, but is Zorn calling play after play to the same receiver, or is Campbell checking down over and over to the same receiver? Is it really possible that Cooley wasn't getting open this game?

I'm starting to think that we should use Campbell outside the 20 and Collins inside the 20. Collins can throw a fade, so the other team would have to respect that near the goal-line. On the other hand, Collins's noodle arm wouldn't be as obvious in this range. It is interesting to note that in a pre-season poll, most on this board considered Campbell the weakest of the NFC East QBs and Collins the strongest of the backups.
I know it's not what is normally done, but does it hurt to give it a try?
mike340 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
 
Page generated in 1.11241 seconds with 10 queries