Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

I guess there are a lot of guys out of the league right now then huh

;)

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;564790]Regardless of his year JC will be in the league for years to come, unless he decides to stop. Remember-Patrick Ramsey is still on a team, Minnesota may bring Favre in. JC, short of a imploding 2009 will have plenty of opportunities to try a new environment.

That said, I would be shocked if he doesn't light up the NFL this year. (I am really hoping that Romo, Sanchez and Cutler all flop - yes you can call me petty)[/quote]

I'm not going to call you petty. I agree. Especially Romo. I hope he's so bad that they bring in Kitna.

As for Sanchez, he's a rook, and most rooks not named Matt Ryan have a tough first year. As for Cutler, I think he'll be missing Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal.

I share your optimism about Campbell. I don't expect Drew Brees but I do expect a QB who will move the chains and, when necessary, carry the team on his back.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=Angry;564774][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]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.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]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.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]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.[/FONT][/COLOR][/quote]


No, he is a good QB with not much to work with. He has his flaws of course, but that is only half the problem. Crappy WRs and an always banged up line spells trouble in the NFL and the NFC East. Last season he ranked 13th in passing even with such a crappy supporting cast minus CP and Moss. Think of the potential if he had a solid line and decent WRs. Believe me if Gus Frerotte could land a starting QB gig in 2008, I am sure a younger JC could land one anywhere if he told the Skins to take a hike. He could easily vye for at least a dozen starting jobs upon leaving the Skins.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

Also you have at least what, a half a dozen starters go down at some point in the season? JC could land a starting job easily.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=DCtoAZ;564761]Gibbs meeting with Zorn .. nothing wrong with that in my mind .. it's been an odd off season, but the more I think about how JC handled himself I really do believe the 10' season is going to be strong .. i'm crossing my fingers for 10-6 ![/quote]


Not sure how JC handling the situation really is going to impact an increase in point production. And besides nobody but JC really knows how he feels about the situation. Anybody could put up a good front, just look at our FO.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=Angry;564774][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][B]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. [/B]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.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]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.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]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. [B]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.[/B][/FONT][/COLOR][/quote]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.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=Angry;564793]Edit: Unless he has a great season, which I don't see happening. Good, maybe, great, no.[/quote]If Campbell does:

338/515, 66%, 23 TD/8 INT, 3,605 yards, 7.0 Y/A: QB Rating of 94.4
(this is my mean projection for Campbell)

Is that "great" or merely good?

Based on last year's offensive environment, he would be 6th in the NFL in QB rating.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=GTripp0012;564874]If Campbell does:

338/515, 66%, 23 TD/8 INT, 3,605 yards, 7.0 Y/A: QB Rating of 94.4
(this is my mean projection for Campbell)

Is that "great" or merely good?

Based on last year's offensive environment, he would be 6th in the NFL in QB rating.[/quote]

He's certainly capable of that type of production.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

JC just needs to start taking more chances and stop playing dink and dunk ball. I don't buy the notion that Zorn isn't calling deep passes. Until he does that then his TD numbers will not improve and that's the bottom line. I don't care about comp. %, or rating. Make more big plays in the passing game and get your team in the end zone and all the stats will take care of itself. Until he does that then he'll never get a big contract. It's put up or shut up for Jason Campbell.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=Mattyk72;564403][URL="http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20090624/SPORTS/706249949/1018/SPORTS09"]HeraldNet: Redskins' past and present, Zorn and Gibbs spend a day at the races[/URL][/quote]

Gibbs is 100% correct. Put the team on your back and drive the offense down the field and win the game. Gibbs tried to get John Elway. It's just part of the business. You have to have some thick ass skin to play QB in the NFL.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=GTripp0012;564874]If Campbell does:

338/515, 66%, 23 TD/8 INT, 3,605 yards, 7.0 Y/A: QB Rating of 94.4
(this is my mean projection for Campbell)

Is that "great" or merely good?

Based on last year's offensive environment, he would be 6th in the NFL in QB rating.[/quote]

that's a big if

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=skinsfan69;564887]JC just needs to start taking more chances and stop playing dink and dunk ball. I don't buy the notion that Zorn isn't calling deep passes. Until he does that then his TD numbers will not improve and that's the bottom line. I don't care about comp. %, or rating. Make more big plays in the passing game and get your team in the end zone and all the stats will take care of itself. Until he does that then he'll never get a big contract. It's put up or shut up for Jason Campbell.[/quote]

Ditto. Stop blaming the WRs. Lots of teams have sucky receivers, but they still manage to score points - Miami, San Diego, Tennessee, Atlanta (well, when Vick was there they sucked). I've seen Miami march 80 yards down the field without throwing a single pass to a WR. New Orleans had so many WR injuries last year, they started putting random guys from the crowd into the game. Brees kept on hitting them for long gains. It's all about Campbell. No more excuses.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;564863]No, he is a good QB with not much to work with. He has his flaws of course, but that is only half the problem. Crappy WRs and an always banged up line spells trouble in the NFL and the NFC East. Last season he ranked 13th in passing even with such a crappy supporting cast minus CP and Moss. Think of the potential if he had a solid line and decent WRs. Believe me if Gus Frerotte could land a starting QB gig in 2008, I am sure a younger JC could land one anywhere if he told the Skins to take a hike. He could easily vye for at least a dozen starting jobs upon leaving the Skins.[/quote]

Well JC doesn't reverse age.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=Mattyk72;564876]He's certainly capable of that type of production.[/quote]

23 TDs, yes. With only 8 picks, no. 23/15 is more reasonable, but I would much rather see that than 13/6.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=44Deezel;564897]23 TDs, yes. With only 8 picks, no. 23/15 is more reasonable, but I would much rather see that than 13/6.[/quote]

Why not split your difference and make it 23 TD's, 12 INT's, a passer rating around 90, and, combined with a bad-ass defense, win the division? Many teams would want JC then. In this scenario, I would be angry if the FO did not offer him a big enough contract to keep him.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=44Deezel;564897]23 TDs, yes. With only 8 picks, no. 23/15 is more reasonable, but I would much rather see that than 13/6.[/quote]

That would be a big jump in INTs for him.

For his career he has thrown 23 INTs over 36 games. Or .6388 INT for every 1 start. Your prediction has him at .9375 for every 1 start.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=skinsfan69;564887]JC just needs to start taking more chances and stop playing dink and dunk ball. I don't buy the notion that Zorn isn't calling deep passes. Until he does that then his TD numbers will not improve and that's the bottom line. I don't care about comp. %, or rating. Make more big plays in the passing game and get your team in the end zone and all the stats will take care of itself. Until he does that then he'll never get a big contract. It's put up or shut up for Jason Campbell.[/quote]

Well I will agree with this. I've thought for awhile that JC plays too safe. I'm just not sure if it's him or the coaching. I don't know if it's been drilled into his head not to turn the ball over since he's been here, but at some point he needs to take control and go for it. A receiver is not always "wide open" and sometimes you have to take a shot and let him make a play. I personally would like to see him be a playmaker instead of a Trent Dilfer manage-the-game type of QB. He has shown the ability and hopefully this year he shows he can do what Gibbs said a QB needs to do. Drive the team down the field in the middle of a hailstorm. I believe he's capable of it, I just hope he believes so too.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=Angry;564795]It was a figure of speech meaning that the only way that he will have a job in the NFL is as a backup.[/quote]

Well your name fits you well. Jason Campbell is still learning to play QB in the NFL. He had to learn a new offense every year since coming to the Redskins. Maybe fans like you need to be patient and let him grow and learn the system. We better hope JC and Zorn succeed in DC cause will be set back another 3 years. Our losing since Synder has taken over due to Coaching changes and QB changes. We can't seem to keep a QB or Coach for more than 3years at a time. We all need to hope JC can improve and resign with the Redskins. Remember teams with good defenses can make it to the Super Bowl, just ask Rex Grossmen.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=skinsfan69;564887]JC just needs to start taking more chances and stop playing dink and dunk ball. I don't buy the notion that Zorn isn't calling deep passes. Until he does that then his TD numbers will not improve and that's the bottom line. I don't care about comp. %, or rating. Make more big plays in the passing game and get your team in the end zone and all the stats will take care of itself. Until he does that then he'll never get a big contract. It's put up or shut up for Jason Campbell.[/quote]

To get the ball down field, JC needs his line to give him time and WR to run the correct routes. Its a team game if their is a break down any where during the play it may not work. Its a team game and everyone has to do their part.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=53Fan;564909]Well I will agree with this. I've thought for awhile that JC plays too safe. I'm just not sure if it's him or the coaching. I don't know if it's been drilled into his head not to turn the ball over since he's been here, but at some point he needs to take control and go for it. A receiver is not always "wide open" and sometimes you have to take a shot and let him make a play. I personally would like to see him be a playmaker instead of a Trent Dilfer manage-the-game type of QB. He has shown the ability and hopefully this year he shows he can do what Gibbs said a QB needs to do. Drive the team down the field in the middle of a hailstorm. I believe he's capable of it, I just hope he believes so too.[/quote]

I wonder if JC was playing not to make a msitake or turn the ball over. He needs to know that he is our QB and no matter what we will ride with him. The coaches have to have confidence in him and let him go out and make plays. This way you let him go out succeed or fail.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=skinsfan69;564890][B]Gibbs is 100% correct. Put the team on your back and drive the offense down the field and win the game. [/B]Gibbs tried to get John Elway. It's just part of the business. You have to have some thick ass skin to play QB in the NFL.[/quote]

That's not exactly the way Gibbs did things in his second stint. Nine time out of ten, he left it up to the defense to win it.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=Mattyk72;564905]That would be a big jump in INTs for him.

For his career he has thrown 23 INTs over 36 games. Or .6388 INT for every 1 start. Your prediction has him at .9375 for every 1 start.[/quote]
That's if you look at it in a linear fashion. Bigger plays = more risks

or receivers that find themselves wide the hell open

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=tryfuhl;564955]That's if you look at it in a linear fashion. Bigger plays = more risks

or receivers that find themselves wide the hell open[/quote]You'd be correct that it's not linear, but it's also not subject to [I]additional[/I] risk unless we become the chuck and duck offense.

As usual, normal variance suggests that 8 INTs is probably more of a floor than anything, but Campbell only had near picks on a handful of throws last year, maybe 5-6. There's always going to be those dropped picks.

David Garrard had a poor year on a 6-10 team. He threw 7 fewer picks than Jay Cutler did on an 8-8 team. So, there's variance based on risk, sure, but Campbell's not going to be picked 15 times this year.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=tryfuhl;564955]That's if you look at it in a linear fashion. Bigger plays = more risks

or receivers that find themselves wide the hell open[/quote]


Big plays with the lame ass WR corp we have(not including Santana, ARE is ok)? Shoot I have a better chance of a threesome with the playmates from the Girls Next Door than us becoming a big play offense. Especially running the WCO.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;564962]Big plays with the lame ass WR corp we have(not including Santana, ARE is ok)? Shoot I have a better chance of a threesome with the playmates from the Girls Next Door than us becoming a big play offense. Especially running the WCO.[/quote]

I'm hoping that Devin Thomas proves you wrong this year. I can't speak for any Girls Next Door.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=Lotus;564966]I'm hoping that Devin Thomas proves you wrong this year. I can't speak for any Girls Next Door.[/quote]

Both u and I have the high hopes for Devin Lotus...I'm looking for him to become a serious big play threat. Sooooo much athleticism there, i mean i really think he's on similar athletic level as Tana but Devin needs to become a skilled WR for the potential to make any difference.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=The Goat;564971]Both u and I have the high hopes for Devin Lotus...I'm looking for him to become a serious big play threat. Sooooo much athleticism there, i mean i really think he's on similar athletic level as Tana but Devin needs to become a skilled WR for the potential to make any difference.[/quote]

I actually think that Devin is at a higher athletic level than Tana. At this point DT might have better speed and he definitely is taller, making him a jump-ball-fade threat that Tana has never been.

But, yes, you are correct, DT's athleticism makes no difference unless he cultivates his skills.

His first year at Michigan State he did nothing but then he tore up the Big Ten his second year. I'm hoping that a similar breakout happens here this year.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=Lotus;564966]I'm hoping that Devin Thomas proves you wrong this year. I can't speak for any Girls Next Door.[/quote]


I hope so too, because I am not too sure about my chances with the Girls Next Door myself!!!!! Only thing is that MSU jocks usually don't make an impact in the NFL or if they do it is not for too long.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=Beemnseven;564942]That's not exactly the way Gibbs did things in his second stint. Nine time out of ten, he left it up to the defense to win it.[/quote]

You're 100% correct.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=44Deezel;564895]Ditto. Stop blaming the WRs. Lots of teams have sucky receivers, but they still manage to score points - Miami, San Diego, Tennessee, Atlanta (well, when Vick was there they sucked). I've seen Miami march 80 yards down the field without throwing a single pass to a WR. [B]New Orleans had so many WR injuries last year, they started putting random guys from the crowd into the game. Brees kept on hitting them for long gains.[/B] It's all about Campbell. No more excuses.[/quote]

Brees came within a few yards of breaking the all time yardage record with David Patton, Devry Henderson, Lance Moore, Robert Meachum and half a season with Colston. Amazing.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=44Deezel;564895]Ditto. Stop blaming the WRs. Lots of teams have sucky receivers, but they still manage to score points - Miami, San Diego, Tennessee, Atlanta (well, when Vick was there they sucked). I've seen Miami march 80 yards down the field without throwing a single pass to a WR. New Orleans had so many WR injuries last year, they started putting random guys from the crowd into the game. Brees kept on hitting them for long gains. It's all about Campbell. No more excuses.[/quote]

Wait, ur comparing Campbell to Brees? I agree that ppl shouldn't completely blame the WRs, although they do tend to drop a lot of balls. But JC is nowhere near where Brees is at this point in his career.

Also, did you notice that all the teams that you mentioned (Miami, San Diego, Tenn, and New Orleans) were in the top 10 of least sacks allowed in 2009?

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=GTripp0012;564960]You'd be correct that it's not linear, but it's also not subject to [I]additional[/I] risk unless we become the chuck and duck offense.

As usual, normal variance suggests that 8 INTs is probably more of a floor than anything, but Campbell only had near picks on a handful of throws last year, maybe 5-6. There's always going to be those dropped picks.

David Garrard had a poor year on a 6-10 team. He threw 7 fewer picks than Jay Cutler did on an 8-8 team. So, there's variance based on risk, sure, but Campbell's not going to be picked 15 times this year.[/quote]

That's likely true. It was pretty crazy how long he went without picks last year even though our WR corp wasn't that good and suffered a bit from cases of the tipsies and dropsies.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=44Deezel;564895]Ditto. Stop blaming the WRs. Lots of teams have sucky receivers, but they still manage to score points - Miami, San Diego, Tennessee, Atlanta (well, when Vick was there they sucked). I've seen Miami march 80 yards down the field without throwing a single pass to a WR. New Orleans had so many WR injuries last year, they started putting random guys from the crowd into the game. Brees kept on hitting them for long gains. It's all about Campbell. No more excuses.[/quote]What you're saying is true in the loosest sense of the term, all those teams had iffy production from the receivers and strong passing offenses, but in a more structured sense, not one of those teams were as bad on the outside as we were.

The Browns and Seahawks were probably worse at WR than we were last year, and you can probably throw the Raiders, Rams, Bears, and Vikings in there as well. But you know what, none of those teams had any semblence of a passing game last year. So, it's not proven that an offense can function at a higher level than ours last year without a better job on the outside. We'll see. The OL should improve, but the WRs must develop because the veterans aren't likely to be more healthy than they were last year.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=GTripp0012;565098]What you're saying is true in the loosest sense of the term, all those teams had iffy production from the receivers and strong passing offenses, but in a more structured sense, not one of those teams were as bad on the outside as we were.

The Browns and Seahawks were probably worse at WR than we were last year, and you can probably throw the Raiders, Rams, Bears, and Vikings in there as well. But you know what,[B] none of those teams had any semblence of a passing game last year.[/B] So, it's not proven that an offense can function at a higher level than ours last year without a better job on the outside. We'll see. The OL should improve, but the WRs must develop because the veterans aren't likely to be more healthy than they were last year.[/quote]

And do you think we did?

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=skinsfan69;565121]And do you think we did?[/quote]Do you want me to qualify this, or can I just leave it as an implied yes (without being taken out of context)?

EDIT
^^Probably reads as more smart alecky than intended. I was trying to ask if the sentence in the context above can stand for itself, or if you really want hard numbers that suggest our passing game was clearly better than Clevelands or Seattles.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=GTripp0012;565150]Do you want me to qualify this, or can I just leave it as an implied yes (without being taken out of context)?

EDIT
^^Probably reads as more smart alecky than intended. I was trying to ask if the sentence in the context above can stand for itself, or if you really want hard numbers that suggest our passing game was clearly better than Clevelands or Seattles.[/quote]

I will agree with you on that. But that's not really saying much. Seattle was crushed by injured wr's and qb. Cleveland doesn't have a legit NFL QB. But having a passing game slightly better than Cleveland and a injury depleted Seattle team isn't saying much.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=skinsfan69;565171]I will agree with you on that. But that's not really saying much. Seattle was crushed by injured wr's and qb. Cleveland doesn't have a legit NFL QB. But having a passing game slightly better than Cleveland and a injury depleted Seattle team isn't saying much.[/quote]No, it's certainly not. Our number one goal on offense should be to make sure we build on what we began last year, and not to regress simply because our QB has his job on the line. Once that is accomplished, the next goal would be to improve the passing efficiency to score more touchdowns.

The key, obviously, is going to be in the big plays. Even when Moss is well covered, we're going to ask Kelly and Thomas to win those one on ones, and the rest should go from there. Those double moves that we like require great pass protection, and there's no guarentee that we can get that, but those vertical routes by secondary wide receivers can be run at any time...if only we get the personnel to run them.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=GTripp0012;564874]If Campbell does:

338/515, 66%, 23 TD/8 INT, 3,605 yards, 7.0 Y/A: QB Rating of 94.4
(this is my mean projection for Campbell)

Is that "great" or merely good?

Based on last year's offensive environment, he would be 6th in the NFL in QB rating.[/quote]


Those numbers are good enough to be great. Questions would arise with it being a contract year though. He needs to add a little more proof to the pudding than that. While those numbers will be good enough to keep him in Washington, they might not be convincing enough for outside organizations to offer him big time money.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

Not sure what football world you're living in Angry, but I can guarantee you if JC has that kind of year and takes the Skins to the playoffs, he will definitely draw interest from a few teams, and Danny will need to show him the $$ to keep him here.

Re: Gibbs' take on Campbell's situation
 

[quote=Mattyk72;565254]Not sure what football world you're living in Angry, but I can guarantee you if JC has that kind of year and takes the Skins to the playoffs, he will definitely draw interest from a few teams, and Danny will need to show him the $$ to keep him here.[/quote]

I guess that you may be right (Matt Cassell), but most organizations want to see more than 1 year of production.