10-30-2009, 12:21 AM | #931 |
Impact Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Doylestown, PA
Posts: 520
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
The most important statistic of a QB is the Win/loss ratio. JC is just not a winner, even when he has impeccable protection. We do have a bad OL, but JC doesn't have the leadership skills and gets rattled easy.
JC is just not a NFL caliber QB. I can't hit the long passes. Many of his best passes were YAC made by the WR/TE/RB. He often misses wide open WR by not seeing them, throwing over, under, behind, etc. He has a poor feel for the rush - either stepping into the rush, rushing his pass when he has time or holding the ball too long. All these "feel" mistakes can be blamed on the poor OL, but other QB in the NFL make money out of it. JC can not. Much of the stats that are sighted are the "junk yards" (like the last game) where the teams are giving him yardage at the end of the game we are going to lose. I predict that JC will never start again in the NFL. He's quickly playing himself out of the NFL, except as a perennial #2 or #3 QB. |
Advertisements |
10-30-2009, 08:29 AM | #932 |
Camp Scrub
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Stafford, VA
Age: 65
Posts: 49
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
JC has the skills, but not the temperament. His stats make him look better than he is because he doesn't (or isnt allowed to) take chances. But mainly, he isn't strong-willed enough. I'll bet he has no presence in the huddle. I've never seen any emotion out of the guy on the field or otherwise. And have you seen his press-conferences.....so mild mannered and doesn't even look the camera in the eye.
__________________
GM First |
10-30-2009, 09:27 AM | #933 | ||
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,323
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
Quote:
If you don't want to look it up, watch a game with stop watch that goes to the hundredths. You'll find the following: 3 seconds of pass pro would be considered average 1.5-1.7 seconds on a 3 step drop the ball should be coming out (a QB should not get hit on a 3 step drop) 4-5 seconds behind a good OL on 5-7 step drop 7 seconds of protection almost never happens |
||
10-30-2009, 09:34 AM | #934 |
\m/
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NY
Age: 52
Posts: 99,464
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Yeah 7 seconds is ridiculous...
Typically if a QB gets a full 3 seconds, that's good protection. |
10-30-2009, 09:49 AM | #935 | |||
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,323
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
You cannot judge a QB by their win/loss record alone. Look at the W/L records of Rodgers in Green Bay or Drew Brees w/ the Saints(prior to this year). Even when he has impeccable protection? When has he even had good protection? Save for a handful of times last game? Quote:
And if JC was making all these mistakes more often the other QBs playing behind a worse OL, without a running game, with a average at best receiving corps, and inconsistent to below average playcalling and coaching then how is it that he's the 18th rated QB in the league? Quote:
The TD to Devin Thomas was junk yardage? On the drive that lead to Fred Davis TD the Eagles weren't playing prevent they were still blitzing. |
|||
10-30-2009, 09:59 AM | #936 |
Warpath Hall of Fame
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 34,420
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
30gut we will just have to disagree. Like I stated, I wanted JC to be that franchise type but to me he just doenst have it. From a mental and leadership perspective of the position he gets very low marks. Good Oline or not. Physical standpoint, he has all the tools. Yeah coaching has some to do with it, maybe he has had too many changes but that is water under the bridge. Another year, another coach, another system is not going to benefit JC here, its time to move on. And like I said, management does not want him here, he has had his chance, good luck to him.
|
10-30-2009, 10:03 AM | #937 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,323
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
His stats make him look good because he has suspect OL, no running, average receiving corps, and up until now inconsistent to lousy playcalling and is still the 18th rated QB in the NFL. All the Skins have to do is win a couple games and i'm sure a bunch of you guys will change your tune. HTTR! |
|
10-30-2009, 10:15 AM | #938 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,323
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
But when people start in with the bashing rhetoric its hard for me to remain silent in the face of spurios claims. http://www.thewarpath.net/618206-post922.html Hey, if you don't think JC can be any better then the 18th QB in the league given the circumstances, cool. But no need to bash the dude. I just don't understand how anyone can judge JC negatively this season. There aren't many QBs in the league that would play better in this situation. And if JC is gone next year who are we gonna find thats actually better? Finding different is easy finding better is another story. |
|
10-30-2009, 10:56 AM | #939 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: PA
Age: 45
Posts: 17,460
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
Someone said JC is doing the "Brunell dink-and dunk" and claimed he doesn't go downfield, so I posted his long completions for each week. Standard stat, I thought!
__________________
Not sent from a Droid, iPhone, Blackberry or toaster |
|
10-30-2009, 10:59 AM | #940 |
\m/
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NY
Age: 52
Posts: 99,464
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Sorry Buster you were a bit vague in your explanation of "Campbell long passes".
Next time make a play, ok? |
10-30-2009, 01:03 PM | #941 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,880
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
I think everything on offense is predicated on and ran through the quarterback. That's why I really believe that the most important thing is to fix that position first, because it is the most important (position) to the offense. To me, you really have to look at the most important positions first to fix things because of the impact they have to their unit and thus their team. Usually, I think one of the last positions that you would consider important on the list is probably a blocker on kickoff returns. |
|
10-30-2009, 02:10 PM | #942 | |
The Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,555
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
__________________
It has taken a long time, but I have finally realized that nothing I say about the Redskins will have any effect upon anything the Redskins do. |
|
10-30-2009, 02:37 PM | #943 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,880
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
My opinion doesn't have a lot of weight and rightfully so, but you have to really listen when someone like Steve Young (who I think has earned his respect) starts his analysis by saying Campbell played a bad game and continues it by putting focus on some of his mistakes. The analysis of these experts also should be used to judge Campbell's play more than the stats. And I don't think there's any analysis that has expressed that Campbell has been playing "very well" up to this point. |
|
10-30-2009, 02:47 PM | #944 |
Playmaker
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Stephens City, VA
Posts: 2,947
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
I want to go out on a limb here and say that Campbell isn't a flawed QB, it's just that i think he lacks the mental side of the game. Campbell's college coach put it the best when he said earlier this year that the hardest battle they fought in Auburn was getting him to believe in himself. He thinks Jason plays scared.
I see all of these things. The NFL is full of QBs who aren't superstars individually, but can do good things with the team. I think of Jeff Garcia, who didnt' have a strong arm, nor was he big physically, but he could always find a way to win and keep a drive alive... Campbell now reminds me of Brunell in 2006. He isn't quite stinking it up, but he's not doing anything to try and win the game either....
__________________
Time to nut up or shut up |
10-30-2009, 02:51 PM | #945 | |
The Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 1,544
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
|
|
|
|