Per Vinny Cerrato, JC is our QB this season!

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Apparently not, because for Skins fans character issues are only important if it refers to Albert Haynesworth and Deangelo Hall

Now to be serious, you make a good point and it would majorly suck to be a fan if this were to happen I would bet money that the same people that are calling for Campbell to leave, would be blasting the FO for trading for Cutler if your scenario were to come to fruition.

Since you brought up character, again, and this discussion seems to be the more active Cutler/Campbell thread, id like to respond to what you said in the other one...

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

It's also unreasonable to think that

a.) Campbell is the only problem the team has (which ppl arguing for Cutler make it look he is).

b.) Trading for Campbell and bringing Cutler is not going to affect the locker room.

c.) Cutler is going to make an immediate difference when he needs to learn the system, is not accustomed to our WRs, and needs to develop a rapport with Zorn (things that Campbell is expected to accomplish since...wait for it...he's in the SAME offense for the 2nd year in a row!).

a) Only a fool would think Campbell is the only problem with this team - i certainly havent been arguing that, but I do think Campbell is A problem and since QB is the most important position on a team, if we have the opportunity for to significantly upgrade the position, we should. If Campbells contract werent up after this season or he were a better fit for the system were in, the story would be different. However, the fact that Campbells contract IS up next year and he isnt where we need him to be, and we're faced with the possibility next year of losing him in free agency without compensation, it makes sense to atleast investigate the QB postion now.

b) That is actually a very good point. Campbell is well-liked and is exactly what you want your QB to be when it comes to attitude and leadership off the field. However, winning chanes everything and if we upgraded the QB position and won more games, the team would be fine with it. On the other hand, if Cutler came here and sucked it up or Campbell went elsewhere and tore it up... things would get real ugly.

c) Those are factors to consider, but you forget that Campbell has been in the same system 2 years in a row before - one that far better suited his skillset - one where he had a far better offensive line and - one that had a much better running game and better performance from Tana - and he still didnt "step up." If he didnt do it then, what makes you think he will do it now?

That last part is a key point for me. Why do so many people expect Campbell to be a much better QB and play much better in his 2nd year under Zorn?

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Since you brought up character, again, and this discussion seems to be the more active Cutler/Campbell thread, id like to respond to what you said in the other one...



a) Only a fool would think Campbell is the only problem with this team - i certainly havent been arguing that, but I do think Campbell is A problem and since QB is the most important position on a team, if we have the opportunity for to significantly upgrade the position, we should. If Campbells contract werent up after this season or he were a better fit for the system were in, the story would be different. However, the fact that Campbells contract IS up next year and he isnt where we need him to be, and we're faced with the possibility next year of losing him in free agency without compensation, it makes sense to atleast investigate the QB postion now.

b) That is actually a very good point. Campbell is well-liked and is exactly what you want your QB to be when it comes to attitude and leadership off the field. However, winning chanes everything and if we upgraded the QB position and won more games, the team would be fine with it. On the other hand, if Cutler came here and sucked it up or Campbell went elsewhere and tore it up... things would get real ugly.

c) Those are factors to consider, but you forget that Campbell has been in the same system 2 years in a row before - one that far better suited his skillset - one where he had a far better offensive line and - one that had a much better running game and better performance from Tana - and he still didnt "step up." If he didnt do it then, what makes you think he will do it now?

That last part is a key point for me. Why do so many people expect Campbell to be a much better QB and play much better in his 2nd year under Zorn?

I thought I was obsessive compulsive. I guess the same reason Hassleback sp? got better. I guess the same reason every QB who has played in the same system for more than 1 year gets better. You do realize that every QB that has played in the WCO has said it takes at least 2 years to become efficient in it right? Do you just dismiss this notion? You do realize the o-line declined in the second half of the season and is expected to be better this year? You understand that by all logic, Thomas and Davis should be better this year right? You understand that Kelly could actually contribute right? You understand that these things are very important to the offense right? I enjoy most of your posts BHA, but you dismiss way to many factors to make your point.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Since you brought up character, again, and this discussion seems to be the more active Cutler/Campbell thread, id like to respond to what you said in the other one...



a) Only a fool would think Campbell is the only problem with this team - i certainly havent been arguing that, but I do think Campbell is A problem and since QB is the most important position on a team, if we have the opportunity for to significantly upgrade the position, we should. If Campbells contract werent up after this season or he were a better fit for the system were in, the story would be different. However, the fact that Campbells contract IS up next year and he isnt where we need him to be, and we're faced with the possibility next year of losing him in free agency without compensation, it makes sense to atleast investigate the QB postion now.

b) That is actually a very good point. Campbell is well-liked and is exactly what you want your QB to be when it comes to attitude and leadership off the field. However, winning chanes everything and if we upgraded the QB position and won more games, the team would be fine with it. On the other hand, if Cutler came here and sucked it up or Campbell went elsewhere and tore it up... things would get real ugly.

c) Those are factors to consider, but you forget that Campbell has been in the same system 2 years in a row before - one that far better suited his skillset - one where he had a far better offensive line and - one that had a much better running game and better performance from Tana - and he still didnt "step up." If he didnt do it then, what makes you think he will do it now?

That last part is a key point for me. Why do so many people expect Campbell to be a much better QB and play much better in his 2nd year under Zorn?

I know this isn't my fight, but I've got to interject something here. Everyone (offensive players, coaches, Saunders, Campbell) acknowledged that Saunders was coaching with one hand tied behind his back by Gibbs. It's not fair to put the lack of offensive production in '07 all on Campbell. Gibbs only let Campbell read one side of the field and 2 receivers. Saunders was 'calling the plays' according to what Gibbs allowed him to call. It's not really a true gauge of what Campbell could have done in the system because he was never allowed to truly explore it freely. Now back to your regularly scheduled argument already in progress.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

I know this isn't my fight, but I've got to interject something here. Everyone (offensive players, coaches, Saunders, Campbell) acknowledged that Saunders was coaching with one hand tied behind his back by Gibbs. It's not fair to put the lack of offensive production in '07 all on Campbell. Gibbs only let Campbell read one side of the field and 2 receivers. Saunders was 'calling the plays' according to what Gibbs allowed him to call. It's not really a true gauge of what Campbell could have done in the system because he was never allowed to truly explore it freely. Now back to your regularly scheduled argument already in progress.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat View Post
a) Only a fool would think Campbell is the only problem with this team - i certainly havent been arguing that, but I do think Campbell is A problem and since QB is the most important position on a team, if we have the opportunity for to significantly upgrade the position, we should. If Campbells contract werent up after this season or he were a better fit for the system were in, the story would be different. However, the fact that Campbells contract IS up next year and he isnt where we need him to be, and we're faced with the possibility next year of losing him in free agency without compensation, it makes sense to at least investigate the QB postion now.

Any trade for Jay Cutler would most likely involve either our 1st rounder or any future picks. In a year when we have so many other (more important) needs, and limited resources (cap/draft picks) getting rid of Campbell at the expense of draft picks is a high price to pay. I wouldn't even put QB play as one of the top two issues that we had last year, so risking so much and gamble that a new QB is going to fix everything is not a good idea.

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat View Post
b) That is actually a very good point. Campbell is well-liked and is exactly what you want your QB to be when it comes to attitude and leadership off the field. However, winning chanes everything and if we upgraded the QB position and won more games, the team would be fine with it. On the other hand, if Cutler came here and sucked it up or Campbell went elsewhere and tore it up... things would get real ugly.

With the PR nightmare that Cutler has caused, even if he had an average season, there would be issues in the locker room. Cutler would need to lead the team deep into the playoffs in order for morale not to be affected. You mentioned that QB is the most important position in the team, and I agree with you, now are you willing to risk the repercussions of getting rid of a well-liked/respected player in Campbell and replace him with someone like Cutler? I mean look at what the Jets went through with Favre last season (although not necessarily the the same situation, but close).

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat View Post
c) Those are factors to consider, but you forget that Campbell has been in the same system 2 years in a row before - one that far better suited his skillset - one where he had a far better offensive line and - one that had a much better running game and better performance from Tana - and he still didnt "step up." If he didnt do it then, what makes you think he will do it now?

Jason Campbell played not even half a season the year that Saunder was brought in, therefore he didn't practice with the first-team more than half the season and during training camp. I think it's unfair to say that he was in Gibbs/Saunders system for two years in a row, when he wasn't the starter for half the season. Not to mention the whole issues mentioned by Paintrain with the game calling. Last season, Jason Campbell was the starting QB during training camp, the preseason and the regular season, and this would make the first time that he will (hopefully) enter a second year (after a full first year) in the same offense and with the same coach as the starting QB.

I honestly feel Gibbs/Saunders should have thrown him to the fire and make him start his second year. Instead, JC sat on the bench his rookie year and half of his second year, watching Mark Brunell throw 5 yd passes.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

That last part is a key point for me. Why do so many people expect Campbell to be a much better QB and play much better in his 2nd year under Zorn?

Is this even a serious question?

I guess experience and familiarity with a system doesn't count for anything in your book?

[hooskins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Is this even a serious question?

I guess experience and familiarity with a system doesn't count for anything in your book?

I also don't get why people don't put blame on the line and WRs? ARE and Moss played like crap towards the end of the season dropping all kinds of passes. Also with a new offense the line needs to step up, but injuries really hurt us.

Obviously if this next season looks similar blame can be placed on Zorn/Campbell.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Is this even a serious question?

I guess experience and familiarity with a system doesn't count for anything in your book?

As I said in the sentence immediately before the sentence you quoted from, its a serious question because:

Campbell had experience and familiarity with Saunders system (he was in it two years), and it didnt "count for anything" then. It did not benefit him at all. He took no giant leaps forward. For that reason, i'm asking - if two years in the same system didnt work before, what makes you think it will work now?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

As I said in the sentence immediately before the sentence you quoted from, its a serious question because:

Campbell had experience and familiarity with Saunders system (he was in it two years), and it didnt "count for anything" then. It did not benefit him at all. He took no giant leaps forward. For that reason, i'm asking - if two years in the same system didnt work before, what makes you think it will work now?

Campbell had 20 starts in Saunders offense, not really enough of a body of work to properly judge how he could have done had they left Saunders in place to continue his development. My guess is he would have taken a nice leap forward in year 3. Plus you have to consider he was in just his 2nd and 3rd years under Saunders and was already in offense #2.

His numbers in Zorn year #1 showed improvement. His completion % was up, his INTs and fumbles were way down, and his overall QB rating took a nearly a 7 point jump. I'm pretty secure in saying I think in Zorn year #2 he's going to take another step forward. It's definitely premature to say he can't fit in this offense or be successful. He at least deserves a 2nd year to tell if he can be the guy or not.

[skinsfan_nn]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Campbell had 20 starts in Saunders offense, not really enough of a body of work to properly judge how he could have done had they left Saunders in place to continue his development. My guess is he would have taken a nice leap forward in year 3. Plus you have to consider he was in just his 2nd and 3rd years under Saunders and was already in offense #2.

His numbers in Zorn year #1 showed improvement. His completion % was up, his INTs and fumbles were way down, and his overall QB rating took a nearly a 7 point jump. I'm pretty secure in saying I think in Zorn year #2 he's going to take another step forward. It's definitely premature to say he can't fit in this offense or be successful. He at least deserves a 2nd year to tell if he can be the guy or not.

I'm not so sure I understand exactly what your basing that from? Remember Collins was just coming off a huge ending to that season.

JC in year two of Al's offense was below par IMO to begin with. I think that's when most within the org. really started to question whether this guy could be the next leader of this team.

As you recall when Al's guy Todd Collins got in the game after Cambell went down in week fourteen, someone that knew and understood what Al wanted we got on a roll and peeled of 4 big games straight and he lead us to a playoff birth.

If Joe & Al would have stayed who knows if JC would have seen a year number 3 as a starter, it could have very well been Collins at the helm. In my point of view even remembering Joe's final presser (Pre-Retirement) I gathered there would at least be a competion for the starting QB position for the following season as he would not commit to Cambell and I think that was a smart move on his behalf. Then we all know what happened Joe descided to step down.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by skinsfan_nn

I'm not so sure I understand exactly what your basing that from? Remember Collins was just coming off a huge ending to that season.

JC in year two of Al's offense was below par IMO to begin with. I think that's when most within the org. really started to question whether this guy could be the next leader of this team.

As you recall when Al's guy Todd Collins got in the game after Cambell went down in week fourteen, someone that knew and understood what Al wanted we got on a roll and peeled of 4 big games straight and he lead us to a playoff birth.

If Joe & Al would have stayed who knows if JC would have seen a year number 3 as a starter, it could have very well been Collins at the helm. In my point of view even remembering Joe's final presser (Pre-Retirement) I gathered there would at least be a competion for the starting QB position for the following season as he would not commit to Cambell and I think that was a smart move on his behalf. Then we all know what happened Joe descided to step down.

JC would have remained the starter had everyone come back. There's no way they would have pulled the plug on him after his first year as the starter for a 36 year old QB who got hot for 4 games.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan_nn

JC in year two of Al's offense was below par IMO to begin with. I think that's when most within the org. really started to question whether this guy could be the next leader of this team.

If Joe & Al would have stayed who knows if JC would have seen a year number 3 as a starter, it could have very well been Collins at the helm. In my point of view even remembering Joe's final presser (Pre-Retirement) I gathered there would at least be a competion for the starting QB position for the following season as he would not commit to Cambell and I think that was a smart move on his behalf. Then we all know what happened Joe descided to step down.

If, 20 starts into a guys career, despite drafting absolutely zero offensive talent (save Campbell himself) since 2004, ANYONE in the organization is questioning his leadership skills, then that's a problem with the organization, not with Campbell.

And I'll just point this out quickly, Joe Gibbs didn't get where he was as a coach by giving up on a 25 year old promising QB for a 36 year old with fewer good games in 12 years in the league than the 25 year old has in 20 starts.

[skinsfan_nn]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

If, 20 starts into a guys career, despite drafting absolutely zero offensive talent (save Campbell himself) since 2004, ANYONE in the organization is questioning his leadership skills, then that's a problem with the organization, not with Campbell.

And I'll just point this out quickly, Joe Gibbs didn't get where he was as a coach by giving up on a 25 year old promising QB for a 36 year old with fewer good games in 12 years in the league than the 25 year old has in 20 starts.

Huh..? Now it's the organization's fault for questioning his leadership skills? well if so they do pay the bills and how would you know what they question? Maybe even though your in MI you have some inside track? I don't know who is questioning his leadership skills maybe you do..? But as it appears they are certainly questioning his get it done skills, just like I am. Last year of the contract,right. No extension,right. Usually a pretty good reason for that...right. Coach's and staff for the team know and see what is really going on with a player.

Let me remind you. In case it was before your time. Joe Gibbs WON ALL THREE super bowls Coaching the Washington Redskins with Veteran QB's, all in there 30's. Joe put the best QB in the pocket that he thought would give him the best results. Pretty GREAT results, huh...Hall of Fame. Not bad.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

As I said in the sentence immediately before the sentence you quoted from, its a serious question because:

Campbell had experience and familiarity with Saunders system (he was in it two years), and it didnt "count for anything" then. It did not benefit him at all. He took no giant leaps forward. For that reason, i'm asking - if two years in the same system didnt work before, what makes you think it will work now?

I've dissected and refuted your arguments on the Campbell thing before (as did GTripp), so I won't rehash. But bottom line (which you never responded to in other threads where we discussed this), how do you explain Campbell's Pro Bowl level numbers in early 2008 as "not being a good fit" for our system?

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I've dissected and refuted your arguments on the Campbell thing before (as did GTripp), so I won't rehash. But bottom line (which you never responded to in other threads where we discussed this), how do you explain Campbell's Pro Bowl level numbers in early 2008 as "not being a good fit" for our system?

Sorry if i missed your responses in the other thread, getting to your bottom line statement -

Campbell was NOT playing at a pro-bowl level early on in the season. All that talk was ridiculous at the time, especially him being talked about as MVP of the league, let alone the team. All campbell did in the first few games was just not throw interceptions... something which was primarily a result Zorn not letting him throw much and really giving him an elementary form of the offense to run. Obviously, when Zorn opened things up some, Campbell was asked to do more... and we all know how the last 8 games went. We did so well in the first half of the season because Campbell wasnt doing much and we were relying on Clinton Portis. As the season wore on, our line declined and so did Clinton. Zorn tried to open things up, he put more on Campbells shoulders, and Campbell couldnt handle it.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Campbell was NOT playing at a pro-bowl level early on in the season. All that talk was ridiculous at the time, especially him being talked about as MVP of the league, let alone the team. All campbell did in the first few games was just not throw interceptions... something which was primarily a result Zorn not letting him throw much and really giving him an elementary form of the offense to run. Obviously, when Zorn opened things up some, Campbell was asked to do more... and we all know how the last 8 games went. We did so well in the first half of the season because Campbell wasnt doing much and we were relying on Clinton Portis. As the season wore on, our line declined and so did Clinton. Zorn tried to open things up, he put more on Campbells shoulders, and Campbell couldnt handle it.

Your hypothesis here is totally and completely factually incorrect at every corner.

But the funny thing is, it's totally necessary for the rest of the argument you've made in this thread to make sense.

You have to deny, deny, deny what has been accepted by fans and the media as common knowledge, but you can't provide one smidgen of evidence to the contrary. Only, you make a hypothesis that relies on the assumption that Campbell is everything that's wrong with the Skins offense to make sense (which obviously is why it makes sense to you. you believe that unconditionally). Except, that's exactly what you're trying to prove.

"I believe 'X'. Therefore, X is proven by the fact that 'Y', something else I believe, necessarily requires that X is true."

Circular logic? That's a basic logical fallacy is it not?