Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Angry

I would have to disagree with two points here. First, the reality is that starting QB jobs are at a premium for QB's of JC's talent. In fact there are several former starting QB's that are either jobless or backups who have posted better numbers than JC. Secondly, JC may be at the end of his rookie contract and he may have made more money than you or I in the past few years, but the fact of the matter is that he is one of the lowest paid starting QB's in the league. Unless he has a monster season, no franchise, the Redskins or otherwise is going to give him the typical payday for an above average starting QB.

Just to throw some food for thought out there, I doubt that there is any type of serious interest out there for a QB like Jason Campbell. In both the Cutler and Sanchez attempts the FO was trying to unload JC on the other team as part of the trade bait. This may be irrelevant, but I find it funny that the only time that Vinny and Danny failed to make the blockbuster trade was when they tried to get rid of JC in the process.

My theory is that if he does not have a stellar year, then he will either be a backup or out of the league by 2010. Even if he does have a fairly good season his only shot at a big payday might be with Washington. At this time he has no leverage; he can only play football and prove himself.

I think your conclusion here is absolutely correct, though I think it's for a completely different reason than what you went through.

The fact of the matter is, that the league is overloaded with capable quarterbacks with considerable short term upside who are toiling somewhere buried on rosters. These players either had their development cut short no fault of their own (Leftwich, nearly Campbell and Brees, and to a lesser extent, Patrick Ramsey) after proving that they belonged at this level. That's one type of player. The other type didn't even have a chance to get screwed over on a poorly run team, as the draft process buried them in NFL obscurity.

A team who wanted to build a winner without spending money at the QB position could do so. You could just have a yearly revolving door of reclamation project quarterbacks who have performed well in the past, and will play for you at the league minimum. Your competitive advantage would be established throughout the rest of your team. While other teams tirelessly exert resources trying to find a great quarterback, you could easily get better quarterback play off the waiver wire.

Of course, thanks to the obscene salary floor, this penny pinching philosophy wouldn't make any sense. You have to spend the money, so why not spend it at every position instead of being selective?

If the salary floor and cap were eliminated, the Jason Campbells, Daunte Culpeppers, and Byron Leftwich's of the world could move from larger market draft pick to smaller market QB of the present. The incentive to save the money would be there for the smaller market teams. In the current system, they can afford to pay the David Garrard and Trent Edwards' of the world mid-level type money despite having no discernable difference between them and the Culpeppers/Leftwich's of the world except that they might become a franchise QB in 2013.

If Campbell earns his extension here, it wouldn't be for Big Ben or Eli type money. It would be for Garrard type money. But that's to an extent, unfair, because Campbell would have had to compete at the level of the Big Bens or Eli's to even have a shot at his contract extension. In the current system, despite the revenue gap between teams, players are still percieved well outside their actual performance level. In a true free market system, the stratification of wealth would help deserving players get multiple oppertunities.