Per Vinny Cerrato, JC is our QB this season!

[MTK]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Not to be argumentative, but do you have stats to back that up? I dont remember us being from behind any more in the 2nd half than we were in the first. To the contrary, in the first half of the season i remember several games where we came from behind and won games in the 4th quarter.

And I also remember blowing alot of early leads in the 2nd half of the season - specifically, our defense seemed to get tired and cave in when we were trying to hold on to a narrow lead.

What you say makes a nice argument on paper, but i just dont remember the games that way. I think a good way to test your statement (and mine) would be to look at the first quarter of every game in 2008. Generally speaking, whats done in the first quarter would be a good representation of the teams basic philosophy. Unfortunately, i did a google search and couldnt find anywhere that had these stats. Any ideas?

I don't know how you want to look at it or what stats you want but in the 8 wins JC averaged 30.375 attempts per game while in the 8 losses he averaged 32.875. Not a huge difference but...

It's interesting to note that Portis averaged 24.25 carries per game in the 8 wins, while only averaging 18.5 in the 8 losses. It's looking like JC didn't necessarily pass that much more in the losses, but the passing game was definitely more effective when the running game was clicking, which down the stretch as we know was pretty bad.

It's also interesting to note that in the 8 wins JC went over 30 attempts 5 times. In the 8 losses he also went over 30 attempts 5 times.

In short, much like most QBs give the guy a running game and he will be fine.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Yawn. Shanahan is definitely less purist than Zorn. He(or maybe Jeremy Bates) has used more shotgun this year to suit Cutler's strengths(while still incorporating WCO short passing) and has always insisted his QBs sell a good play action fake. Zorn should do more of that for Campbell. just sayin'

I agree.. he wasn't put into the position to make a lil something more out of what they had as he should've been. I mean you can only go shotgun, rollout, etc so much.. but it seemed like Zorn forgot that these things that buy you a couple extra seconds existed

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Not to be argumentative, but do you have stats to back that up? I dont remember us being from behind any more in the 2nd half than we were in the first. To the contrary, in the first half of the season i remember several games where we came from behind and won games in the 4th quarter.

And I also remember blowing alot of early leads in the 2nd half of the season - specifically, our defense seemed to get tired and cave in when we were trying to hold on to a narrow lead.

What you say makes a nice argument on paper, but i just dont remember the games that way. I think a good way to test your statement (and mine) would be to look at the first quarter of every game in 2008. Generally speaking, whats done in the first quarter would be a good representation of the teams basic philosophy. Unfortunately, i did a google search and couldnt find anywhere that had these stats. Any ideas?

People can bend stats however they want to in order to suit their arguments. I have rewatched virtually every Redskins game (except for the Steelers and Ravens games) from '08 in the past month or so and trust me, the offense was NOT opened up at all. Campbell was still throwing shallow crosses and deep ins 80% of the time. Very rarely did he even look deep. While his attempts we up, that is not a direct indication to 'opening up the offense'. So back to my original question, which games did we 'open it up' and Campbell wasn't able to handle it?

[Paintrain]

BHA (or other Campbell detractors) one more Campbell question, can you pinpoint a specific loss and put that game on him? Understanding that no one player is ever responsible for a win or loss, but can you say in the X game if Campbell had done X then we would have won rather than lost?

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

BHA (or other Campbell detractors) one more Campbell question, can you pinpoint a specific loss and put that game on him? Understanding that no one player is ever responsible for a win or loss, but can you say in the X game if Campbell had done X then we would have won rather than lost?

I would think the argument for this would be that JC has been mostly a game manager. Game managers are usually not responsible for winning or losing the game. I think JC detractors would like to see him take more chances with the ball and make more plays and score more points even if on the flip side that comes with more mistakes and an occasional lost game that he is responsible for.

I am on the fence on JC...I am mostly a supporter of his...but at the same time he does need to make more plays next season.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by celts32

I would think the argument for this would be that JC has been mostly a game manager. Game managers are usually not responsible for winning or losing the game. I think JC detractors would like to see him take more chances with the ball and make more plays and score more points even if on the flip side that comes with more mistakes and an occasional lost game that he is responsible for.

I am on the fence on JC...I am mostly a supporter of his...but at the same time he does need to make more plays next season.

I think even the most ardent Campbell supporters would agree with you that he's been more of a game manager than a playmaker in our offense. I'm with you about being JC more of a risk/reward player. I think that comes with time and getting away from the Gibbs fraidy-cat offense he was 'raised' in.

But some (BHA and others) speak as if he's a disaster behind the center and is solely causing us to not win games. That's the logic I don't get.

[CRedskinsRule]

k I was really bored at work so:

1 2 3 4
WEEK 1 * represents Redskins
*0 7 0 0
10 6 0 0

WEEK 2
0 10 14 0
*3 6 6 14

WEEK 3
0 7 10 0
*7 3 7 7

WEEK 4
*0 17 3 6
7 3 7 7

WEEK 5
*0 9 7 7
14 0 0 3

WEEK 6
3 7 6 3
*7 0 0 10

WEEK 7
0 0 3 8
*0 0 7 7

WEEK 8
*3 3 10 9
7 3 0 7


WEEK 9 (SAMUELS INJURED THIS WEEK)
0 10 6 7
*6 0 0 0 remember first 2 possessions started in Pittsburgh Territory

WEEK 11
0 7 0 7
*7 3 0 0

WEEK 12
*0 7 10 3
3 7 0 7

WEEK 13
10 3 7 3
*0 7 0 0

WEEK 14
*0 0 0 10
14 0 3 7

WEEK 15
*0 10 0 3
14 3 0 3

WEEK 16
0 0 3 0
*0 3 7 0

WEEK 17
*0 17 0 7
7 0 7 13


Ya know, I don't care what else happens next year we bettter D*** well score in the first quarter.

edit: sorry this is not all fancy and what not, i still do have to do some work.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

I think even the most ardent Campbell supporters would agree with you that he's been more of a game manager than a playmaker in our offense. I'm with you about being JC more of a risk/reward player. I think that comes with time and getting away from the Gibbs fraidy-cat offense he was 'raised' in.

But some (BHA and others) speak as if he's a disaster behind the center and is solely causing us to not win games. That's the logic I don't get.

Agreed...He is not a disaster at all. Anyone saying that is not watching the games. I am on record saying that I would trade alot to get Cutler if he became available because I think he will be great and the Redskins have not had a great QB in a generation. That said I do think JC can be a good QB in the league and assuming Cutler is unatainable I do want to stick with Campbell and hope he progresses.

[CRedskinsRule]

10 out of 16 weeks, we had 0pts in the 1st quarter
3 times we had less than 7pts in the 1st quarter
0 times did we score more than 10pts

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

People can bend stats however they want to in order to suit their arguments. I have rewatched virtually every Redskins game (except for the Steelers and Ravens games) from '08 in the past month or so and trust me, the offense was NOT opened up at all. Campbell was still throwing shallow crosses and deep ins 80% of the time. Very rarely did he even look deep. While his attempts we up, that is not a direct indication to 'opening up the offense'. So back to my original question, which games did we 'open it up' and Campbell wasn't able to handle it?

I based my statement about "opening it up" on the fact that we seemed to be passing much more than running in the 2nd half of the season. While I didnt reply directly to you, thats where I was getting it. The fact that our o-line was getting weaker in pass-protection, yet we all but abandoned the running game (exaggeration, but you get the point) while increasing pass attempts? Why? Seems like a shift in focus to me. Why abandon something that was working so well, and still the obvious strength of the team? Portis alluded to this on espn980 during the season.

Also, since you say you watched every game twice, then you, like me, also noticed Campbells tendancy to never get beyond his 2nd read (hard to tell by watching games, but ive noticed it a couple times and have read about it - teams know that about Campbell and exploit it) and lock down on his check-down receiver. As a Campbell supporter, whats your explaination for this? Why does Campbell, in your words, "never even look deep?" Why throw for 3 yards on 3rd down when he needed 5? or 7 when he needed 10? over and over and over again. Did he learn too many bad lessons from mark Brunell?

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

k I was really bored at work so:

1 2 3 4
WEEK 1 * represents Redskins
*0 7 0 0
10 6 0 0

WEEK 2
0 10 14 0
*3 6 6 14

WEEK 3
0 7 10 0
*7 3 7 7

WEEK 4
*0 17 3 6
7 3 7 7

WEEK 5
*0 9 7 7
14 0 0 3

WEEK 6
3 7 6 3
*7 0 0 10

WEEK 7
0 0 3 8
*0 0 7 7

WEEK 8
*3 3 10 9
7 3 0 7


WEEK 9 (SAMUELS INJURED THIS WEEK)
0 10 6 7
*6 0 0 0 remember first 2 possessions started in Pittsburgh Territory

WEEK 11
0 7 0 7
*7 3 0 0

WEEK 12
*0 7 10 3
3 7 0 7

WEEK 13
10 3 7 3
*0 7 0 0

WEEK 14
*0 0 0 10
14 0 3 7

WEEK 15
*0 10 0 3
14 3 0 3

WEEK 16
0 0 3 0
*0 3 7 0

WEEK 17
*0 17 0 7
7 0 7 13


Ya know, I don't care what else happens next year we bettter D*** well score in the first quarter.

edit: sorry this is not all fancy and what not, i still do have to do some work.

Dont know where you got all that but thanks! Thats exactly what i was wanting to see.

[CRedskinsRule]

i did a lot of cut and paste from the nfl.com score pages. I really think the most glaring thing is that the team always seemed to need a 1/4 to find its rhythm (if it found it at all). If that doesn't change this year, regardless of the qb, then Zorn will be gone. I hope, this is where the 2nd season, continuity, everyone on the same page from the get go, makes a huge difference!

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Zorn screwed with the running game the 2nd half of the season, which obviously hurt everything, but go to this link here and tell me you dont see Campbell with more pass attempts in the 2nd half of the season.

Jason Campbell: Game Logs

What you see is against PITT, NYG & BAL the attempts are unusually high, due to the fact that no running game could be established against those defenses. So we were forced to pass. It had nothing to do with Zorn "screwing with the running game".

In the 2nd half of of the season, IMO Zorn got cocky and tried to do more of the pass-happy WCO. We relied more on Campbell and less on Portis. The results speak for themselves.

Incorrect. Injuries / age breakdown of the OL hurt both the run & pass games. Portis' YPC went way down in the 2nd half of the season, is that a playcalling issue? With less carries he should've had fresher legs and at least kept his YPC at the same level as earlier in the season.

I am very critical of Campbell, but i'm even more critical of Zorn - great coaches adapt their system, schemes, play-calling, etc to suit the talent they have on their roster. In the second half of the season, Zorn tried to make the talent on the roster fit his system (square peg, round hole).

Incorrect again. You cannot have a successful offense with a sub-par OL. What offensive play calls can you make that require no blocking? Screens, draws? I seem to remember more than a few timely screens or draws called (or Campbell scrambles out of trouble) that kept dirves going that otherwise would've stalled. Our OL performance dropped significantly in the 2nd half of the year. This isn't a "square-peg round-hole" issue.

The problem isn't Campbell and Zorn as you keep stating. It was clearly the OL (and some pretty good defenses, PITT, BAL, NYG) that caused the decreased offensive production in the 2nd half of the year.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

I based my statement about "opening it up" on the fact that we seemed to be passing much more than running in the 2nd half of the season. While I didnt reply directly to you, thats where I was getting it. The fact that our o-line was getting weaker in pass-protection, yet we all but abandoned the running game (exaggeration, but you get the point) while increasing pass attempts? Why? Seems like a shift in focus to me. Why abandon something that was working so well, and still the obvious strength of the team? Portis alluded to this on espn980 during the season.

Also, since you say you watched every game twice, then you, like me, also noticed Campbells tendancy to never get beyond his 2nd read (hard to tell by watching games, but ive noticed it a couple times and have read about it - teams know that about Campbell and exploit it) and lock down on his check-down receiver. As a Campbell supporter, whats your explaination for this? Why does Campbell, in your words, "never even look deep?" Why throw for 3 yards on 3rd down when he needed 5? or 7 when he needed 10? over and over and over again. Did he learn too many bad lessons from mark Brunell?

As to the first bolded point, I don't completely disagree with you. What I saw was us becoming way too predictable with our running which made it less effective and forced us to pass more. We seemed to run about 5 running plays over and over and over. Stretch right, pump fake draw, dive behind Kendall, straight draw, stretch left. Very unimaginative running attack. I'm sure some had to do with the offensive line being ineffective but a chunk falls onto Zorn as well. When the run was getting stuffed, Zorn had to try to get the offense moving thru the air.

As for the 2nd bolded part, I disagree that Campbell never makes it off of his 2nd read. This was an early criticism, but even Zorn noted near mid season that Campbell may have been progressing thru all of his reads too quickly!

Case in point, against Dallas the 2nd time, on the crucial 4th down near midfield with 6:40 left in the 4th quarter, his first read was Moss, wasn't open, he looked to Cooley, double covered, Portis was coming off a chip block and was 2 yds shy of the 1st with an LB looming, he looked back to Moss under presser-too late but tried to get it to him anyways and it was incomplete.

As for why he doesn't look deep, probably because the patterns aren't send WR deep. Why throw 3 yds on a 3rd and 5, maybe because that's where the receiver ran the route, maybe the D was in a coverage shell that gave everything underneath but nothing past the sticks, who knows. There are plenty of reasons why something like that would happen that are not QB driven. Would you rather see a pass forced into triple coverage?

He learned plenty of 'bad' habits/lessons IMO from the Brunell/Gibbs debacle. Unfortunately he's got to unlearn those before he makes some of the progressions we'd like to see.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

How is it a "fact" that he was performing at a pro-bowl level? Thats a matter of opinion. All campbell did was manage games and not throw interceptions - generally, that doesnt get a guy in the pro-bowl. In the first half of the season, Campbell only threw 8 Touchdowns - thats an average of one a game. usually, guys averaging 1 TD a game dont go to the pro-bowl.

Its nice to say "he was performing at a pro-bowl level" but what does that really mean? To make it to the pro-bowl, Campbell would have be one of the top 3 QBs in the NFC (1 Starter, 2 alternates). Was he?

For their first 8 games of the season, Kurt Warner (14TD, 6 INT), Drew Brees (15TD, 7 INT), Tony Romo (14-5 in only 6 games before injury), and Aaron Rogers (13 TD, 5 INT) were all performing at a higher level than Campbell. (I looked up TDs and INTs online but not yards and other stats because i dont have the time). Campbell was playing exceptionally effecient, but he wasnt doing enough to garner serious pro-bowl consideration. he certainly couldnt be considered better than Warner, Brees or Romo, although an argument could have been made for Rogers. Either way, he wouldnt have been in teh top 3. During the first half of the season, Campbells play was more in line with that of guys like Eli manning and Donovan McNabb - good, but not good enough to go to the pro-bowl.

This is your best, and most realistic argument in the thread, not to mention that you've gone out of your way to support it.

For the record, I didn't agree with Ron Jaworski at the time he said that Jason Campbell was the first half league MVP. I thought he was the second or third most valuable player on the offense in that half of the year. He was definately very valuable to us, but not moreso than Brees or Romo or Warner, I would agree.

However, Jason Campbell was the only one of the players on our offense who actually improved the level of play in the second half of the year (well, Fred Davis if you want to go there). The only empirical evidence I can back this up with is his efficiency on QB rushes, non-existant in the first half as the offense was a burden to learn, but more effective in the second half of the year than any other QB in the NFL. Throuough tape study backs my opinion here. Moss pulled his hammy at the end of the Detroit game and was not productive from that point on. Randle El stayed productive through December 1st and then fell off of the face of the earth. Portis was half as effective as he was in the first eight games (this was mostly because of the run defenses we faced, our OL was simply overmatched). Cooley was rather inconsistent. Devin Thomas never did get it together. By the final three weeks of the year (mind you after playing 4 of the 5 best defenses in the second half of the year during the prior 6 weeks), the running game was practically non existant. Campbell, in essence was the entire offense.

He was making faster, smarter reads on the whole (he made some big mistakes against Philly), but most telling, started to deliver first down passes on the money while getting drilled in the chops. Scouts will tell you that those plays are what separates franchise QBs from the rest. Maybe they just think that. Maybe it doesn't matter. Point is, unlike critcisms like reads and progressions, that actually happened.

On the macro level, the national media sees the decline in the total production of the Redskins offense, they don't take into account that they played three awful Ds in October (masking when the decline began), while playing 5 top defenses in November and December. So they see decline, and they start pointing fingers at the most noticible culprits. Sadly, this passes for football analysis these days. Hey, gotta get columns out somehow.